Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 12/31/1998 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: September 24, 1997

According to a 10-Q filing dated 04/14/1999, by Memorandum Opinion issued and Final Judgment entered on December 31, 1998, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division ordered that the defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint be granted, ordered that the federal securities fraud claims be dismissed with prejudice, and denied the plaintiff's request for leave to further amend the complaint. The period for appeal of this judgment has expired. The state law claims were dismissed without prejudice to their being refiled in the appropriate state court.

The original complaint alleged that the company prematurely recognized 100% of revenues on purported sales of its products to customers in lesser developed countries in violation of GAAP. The complaint noted that the company's fiscal 1997 10-K disclosed that the company had taken a charge of $11.2 million to cover anticipated losses from default. The complaint also alleged that defendants failed to disclose certain factors that were adversely affecting its performance, including increased competition and that certain customers were delaying purchase of Input/Output systems and awaiting the availability of I/O System Three, which was delayed due to production and development problems.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Scientific & Technical Instr.
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: IO
Company Market: New York SE
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: S.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 97-CV-3210
JUDGE: Hon. Kenneth M. Hoyt
DATE FILED: 09/24/1997
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/17/1996
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/18/1997
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Emmons & Associates
    3990 Essex Ln at Weslayan. Ste 1116., Emmons & Associates , TX 77027
    713.522.4435 713.527.8850 · info@emmonsjackson.com/
  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 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 97-CV-3210
JUDGE: Hon. Kenneth M. Hoyt
DATE FILED: 04/17/1998
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/17/1996
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/18/1997
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Emmons & Associates
    3990 Essex Ln at Weslayan. Ste 1116., Emmons & Associates , TX 77027
    713.522.4435 713.527.8850 · info@emmonsjackson.com/
  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 ·
No Document Title Filing Date