Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 05/15/2000 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: August 26, 1998

According to a press release dated June 15, 2000, Ciena Corporation (CIEN) announced that the plaintiffs in the consolidated securities class action lawsuit against the Company and certain of its officers and directors have agreed to waive their right to appeal the earlier decision of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland dismissing the lawsuit without leave to amend. In exchange, the Company agreed to not seek attorneys' or costs under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 or otherwise against the plaintiffs or their lawyers.

On May 15, 2000, the Maryland federal district court issued an order dismissing the consolidated securities class action complaint naming Ciena and certain of its officers and directors as defendants. The complaint, originally filed on August 26, 1998 and subsequently dismissed, amended and re-filed on August 20, 1999, alleged that Ciena and certain of its officers and directors violated certain provisions of the federal securities laws by making false statements, failing to disclose material information and taking other actions to artificially inflate and maintain the market price of Ciena's common stock during the class period of May 21, 1998 to September 14, 1998. Ciena's motion to dismiss the second amended complaint was granted and the action was dismissed by the order of the Honorable J. Frederick Motz, United States District Judge for the District of Maryland. This order was subject to the plaintiffs' right to appeal, which they now have waived.

The original complaint charges Ciena and certain officers and directors of the Company during the relevant time period with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that defendants
issued a series of materially false and misleading statements concerning the
Company's financial results, operations and technologies. Because of the
issuance of a series of false and misleading statements, the price of Ciena
common stock was artificially inflated during the Class Period. Prior to the
disclosure of the adverse facts described above, certain officers and directors
of Ciena sold significant amounts of Ciena stock to the unsuspecting public.
These sales generated proceeds of over $18 million.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CIEN
Company Market: NASDAQ
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: D. Maryland
DOCKET #: 98-CV-02946
JUDGE: Hon. Joseph Young
DATE FILED: 08/26/1998
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/21/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/21/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY), NY 10119-1065
    212.594.5300 ·
  2. Rosen & Associates
    P.O. Box 25 Toronto Dominion Centre, Suite 3825, , Rosen & Associates, ON 511
    416.363.4510 416.363.4840 · webinfo@rosen-associates.com
  3. Tydings & Rosenberg LLP
    100 East Pratt Street, Tydings & Rosenberg LLP, MD 21202
    410.752.9700 410.757.5460 · webmaster@tydingslaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Maryland
DOCKET #: 98-CV-02946
JUDGE: Hon. Joseph Young
DATE FILED: 08/20/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/21/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/14/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Lawrence G. Soicher
    342 Madison Avenue, 18th Floor , Lawrence G. Soicher, NY 10173
    212/883.8000 ·
  2. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY), NY 10119-1065
    212.594.5300 ·
  3. Rosen & Associates
    P.O. Box 25 Toronto Dominion Centre, Suite 3825, , Rosen & Associates, ON 511
    416.363.4510 416.363.4840 · webinfo@rosen-associates.com
  4. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  5. Tydings & Rosenberg LLP
    100 East Pratt Street, Tydings & Rosenberg LLP, MD 21202
    410.752.9700 410.757.5460 · webmaster@tydingslaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date