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: According to a press release dated January 22, 2010, the complaint charges Motorola and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the federal securities laws for intentionally and knowingly misstating the 2007 fourth quarter earnings projections and sales demands for the RAZR2 during the 2007 holiday shopping season. Despite that fact that the RAZR2 was not attracting buyers in 2007 because it had not improved enough from the RAZR to earn the $299 price tag, numerous positive statements were made by Defendants. Motorola was losing significant market share to competitors for similar mobile handhelds. The Company reported 900,000 RAZR2s sold between August 2007 and September 31, 2007, on track to sell a total of 1.5 million RAZR2s between October 1, 2007 and December 31, 2007. With this information, the senior executives knew that the Company was not on track to hit the $0.12-$0.14 profits that they had promised on December 6, 2007.

On April 5, 2010, the Plaintiff's motion to appoint St.Lucie County Fire District Firefighters' Pension Trust Fund as lead plaintiff and to appoint the law firm of Scott and Scott as lead counsel with Freed and Weiss as liaison counsel was granted. On June 11, 2010, the lead plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, widening the class period and adding certain individuals of the company as named defendants. On August 13, 2010, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint.

Before any ruling on that motion, on December 3, 2010, the lead plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint. The defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss on December 17, 2010, and on February 28, 2011, the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall signed the Order granting the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. The case is now dismissed with prejudice.

On March 25, 2011, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal. The case was later remanded to the district court for the limited purpose of conducting class action settlement approval proceedings.

On June 17, 2011, a Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement was filed. According to the Settlement Agreement, the proposed settlement is in the amount of $3,150,000. The settlement was preliminarily approved on July 7, 2011. The Final Approval Hearing was set for November 2, 2011. That day, the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall granted the plaintiff's motion for final approval of the proposed settlement, class certification, and the plan of distribution. The action is now dismissed 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

St. Lucie County Fire District Firefighters' Pension Trust Fund, et al. v. Motorola, Inc., et al.

COURT: N.D. Illinois	DOCKET NUMBER: 10-CV-00427
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Virginia M. Kendall
DATE FILED: 01/21/2010	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/06/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 01/22/2008
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
David R. Scott 108 Norwich Avenue; P.O. Box 192, Colchester, CT, 06415 (voice) 860.537.5537, (fax) 860.537.5537, Freed & Weiss LLC 111 West Washington Street, Suite 1331, Chicago, IL, 60602-3455 (voice) 312-220-0000, (fax) 312-220-7777, Scott & Scott LLP (San Diego) 600 B Street, Suite 1500, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.233.4565, (fax) 619.233.4565, scottlaw@scott-scott.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/21/2010
Notification of Docket Entry
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 04/05/2010

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

St. Lucie County Fire District Firefighters' Pension Trust Fund, et al. v. Motorola, Inc., et al.

COURT: N.D. Illinois	DOCKET NUMBER: 10-CV-00427
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 12/03/2010	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/25/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 01/22/2008
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
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 Scott & Scott LLP (New York-Current) 500 Fifth Avenue, 40th Floor, New York, NY, 10110 (voice) 212.223.6444, (fax) 212.223.6334, Scott & Scott LLP (Ohio) 12434 Cedar Road, Suite 12, Cleveland Heights, OH, 44106 (voice) 216.229.6088, (fax) 216.229.6088, scottlaw@scott-scott.com Scott & Scott LLP (San Diego) 600 B Street, Suite 1500, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.233.4565, (fax) 619.233.4565, scottlaw@scott-scott.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 4

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Amended Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 06/14/2010
Second Amended Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 12/03/2010
Judgment In A Civil Action
Type: Other		Date on the document: 02/28/2011
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 02/28/2011
Notice Of Appeal
Type: Notice of Appeal		Date on the document: 03/25/2011
Order: Limited Remand
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/04/2011
Notice Of Pendency And Proposed Settlement Of Class Action
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/17/2011
Proof Of Claim And Release
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/17/2011
[Proposed] Final Judgment And Order Of Dismissal
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/17/2011
[Proposed] Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement And Providing For Notice
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/17/2011
Settlement Agreement
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/17/2011
Summary Notice
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/17/2011
Unopposed Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Settlement, And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Unopposed Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Class Action Settlement
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/17/2011
Stipulation And [Proposed] Order Substituting Revised Settlement Agreement In Place And Stead Of The Settlement Agreement Vs. Previously Filed With The Court As Docket Entry 96, Motorola, INC., Edward J. Zander, Attachment 1
Type: Other		Date on the document: 07/06/2011
Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement And Providing For Notice
Type: Other		Date on the document: 07/07/2011
Order Approving Plan of Distribution of Settlement Proceeds
Type: Order		Date on the document: 11/02/2011
Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses to Plaintiffs' Counsel and Granting the Request of the Lead Plaintiff and Named Plaintiff for Reimbursement of Costs and Expenses
Type: Order		Date on the document: 11/02/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 01/04/2012

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

�