Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 04/03/2001 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: October 02, 1998

According to the docket posted, on February 17, 1999, the Court entered the Stipulation and Order signed by U.S. District Judge Reginald C. Lindsay, consolidating all actions under "In Re Spectran Securities Litigation," Civil Action No. 98CV12003RCL. On February 17, 1999, the plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint, and on March 26, 1999, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint. On March 30, 2001, the Court entered the both the Report and Recommendation and Judgment, granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. The case was closed. On May 22, 2001, the Court further entered the Order granting the joint motion to dismiss the action and withdraw all pending motions. All motions were withdrawn and the documents were terminated as of November 6, 2001.

The original complaint alleges that defendants artificially inflated the price of SpecTran stock by misrepresenting Spectran's financial condition and financial results, causing the Company's investors to suffer significant financial losses. According to the complaint the defendants embarked on a scheme and continuing course of conduct to mislead the market into believing that defendants had corrected all of the problems at Spectran's Specialty Optics division, when in fact Specialty Optics was suffering from operating and inventory issues which were negatively impacting its earnings.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: SPTR
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. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 98-CV-12003
JUDGE: Hon. Reginald C. Lindsay
DATE FILED: 10/02/1998
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/25/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/17/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Donald B. Lewis
    Donald B. Lewis 5 Cynwyd Road, Donald B. Lewis, PA 19004
    610.668.0330 ·
  2. Law Offices of Marc Redlich (Boston)
    Three Center Plaza, Law Offices of Marc Redlich (Boston), MA 02108
    617.720.0900 617.720.0900 · redlichlaw@aol.com
  3. Savett Frutkin Podell & Ryan, P.C.

    800.993.3233 · sfprpc@op.net
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 98-CV-12003
JUDGE: Hon. Reginald C. Lindsay
DATE FILED: 02/17/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/25/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/17/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Law Offices of Marc Redlich (Boston)
    Three Center Plaza, Law Offices of Marc Redlich (Boston), MA 02108
    617.720.0900 617.720.0900 · redlichlaw@aol.com
No Document Title Filing Date