According to the docket, on February 3, 2000, the Court entered the Mandate of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, affirming the decision of the District Court.
In October 1996, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the plaintiffs had not met the pleading requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The motion was denied by the court on February 13, 1997. On February 13, 1998, FTP filed a motion for partial summary judgment and renewed motion to dismiss; plaintiffs filed their response on March 20, 1998. On September 29, 1998, the Court entered the Order signed by U.S. District Judge Joseph L. Tauro, granting the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment and also granting the renewed motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. The case was closed, but the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on October 2, 1998.
The original class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, naming FTP, certain of its officers and two former officers as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants publicly issued false and misleading statements and omitted to disclose material facts necessary to make such statements not false and misleading, which the plaintiffs contend caused an artificial inflation in the price of FTP's common stock. The lawsuit, which is purportedly brought on behalf of a class of purchasers of FTP's common stock during the period from July 14, 1995 to January 3, 1996, alleges violations of Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. FTP has reviewed the allegations in the lawsuit, believes them to be without merit, and intends to defend itself and its officers vigorously. In order to support an adequate defense, FTP may be required to expend substantial sums for legal and expert fees and costs. The cost of defending the litigation and the outcome of the litigation are uncertain and cannot be estimated. If the lawsuit were determined adversely to FTP, FTP could be required to pay a substantial judgment.
