Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 12/06/2001 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: October 28, 1999

In a press release dated December 11, 2001, a federal judge last week approved a $5.75 million settlement in a shareholders' suit against Unisys Corp. and awarded the plaintiffs' lawyers one-third of the fund, or nearly $1.9 million. Senior U.S. District Judge Clarence C. Newcomer also awarded the plaintiffs' team in In Re: Unisys Corp. Securities Litigation more than $572,000 in costs.

According to the docket, on June 20, 2000, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint. On September 21, 2000, the Court entered the Memorandum and Order signed by U.S. District Judge Clarence C. Newcomer which denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint.

The original Complaint charges that Unisys and three of its highest officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Complaint alleges that defendants issued materially misleading press releases purporting to describe large contracts with major customers, which failed to reveal that the contracts were subject to regulatory and other contingencies, and therefore could not be expected to generate revenues in the near future. The Complaint further alleges that defendants utilized their inside information regarding the artificial inflation of the Company's stock price to sell significant amounts of their personal Unisys stock holdings, for proceeds of over $4 million. In addition, the complaint alleges that the artificial inflation of the price of Unisys stock permitted the company to complete an acquisition of Pulsepoint Communications for fewer shares of stock.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: UIS
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: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 99-CV-5333
JUDGE: Hon. Clarence C. Newcomer
DATE FILED: 10/28/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/04/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/14/1999
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 · investorprotect@bm.net
  2. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
  3. Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego)
    1818 Market Street, Suite 2500, Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego), PA 19103
    215.496.0300 215.496.6611 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 99-CV-5333
JUDGE: Hon. Clarence C. Newcomer
DATE FILED: 05/01/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/04/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/14/1999
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 · investorprotect@bm.net
  2. Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego)
    1818 Market Street, Suite 2500, Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego), PA 19103
    215.496.0300 215.496.6611 ·
No Document Title Filing Date