According to the docket, on February 11, 2000, the Court entered the Order by U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick dismissing the case for the reason that plaintiff failed to file a second amended complaint by January 10, 2000. Earlier, on December 15, 1999, Judge Orrick issued a Memorandum and Order dismissing the plaintiff’s first amended complaint for failure to satisfy the pleading requirement for materiality and scienter under PSLRA. Also, on November 18, 1999, Judge Orrick granted the motion to dismiss the first amended complaint. On April 8, 1999, the case was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The complaint alleges Airtouch stock had recently been on the rise on reports that the company was involved "in off-again and on-again talks with a number of potential acquirors." On January 3, 1999, the company issued a press release stating that Airtouch was in late-stage negotiations with Bell Atlantic (NYSE:BEL) "that could lead to a possible business combination between the two companies." Led to believe that the bidding war over AirTouch was over almost before it had begun, AirTouch shareholders began a huge sell-off of their AirTouch shares, with the stock closing down over $4, at $68 1/16, on January 4, 1999. However, what the January 3 press release failed to mention was that another bidder, Vodafone, was also engaged in negotiating to acquire AirTouch. Specifically, as was reported two days later, Vodafone had approached AirTouch about a possible merger, offering more than $45 billion, topping the estimated value of Bell Atlantic's offer and setting the stage for a possible battle over AirTouch. Once Vodafone's interest in acquiring AirTouch was belatedly disclosed, the price of the Company's shares soared $9.25 to close at $77-1/2 on January 5, 1999.