Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 02/23/2001 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: January 27, 2000

According to an article in the Washington Business Journal dated February 23, 2001, the has dismissed a class action lawsuit against V-One. In the suit filed against V-One, shareholders alleged the company's officers manipulated stock values by strategically issuing press releases that linked its products with the Linux operating system, which at the time was enjoying a surge in popularity. U.S. District Judge Marvin J. Garbis ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to prove the company had violated securities laws and dismissed the suit "with prejudice." Costs were awarded to V-One.

The original Complaint charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10-b(5). The action arises from damages incurred by the Class as a result of a scheme and common course of conduct by defendants which operated as a fraud and deceit on the Class during the Class Period. Defendants' scheme included rendering false and misleading statements and/or omissions concerning the present and future financial condition and business prospects of the Company, as well as the financial benefits that would enure to V-One and its shareholders.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Networks
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: VONE
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 #: 00-CV-00263
JUDGE: Hon. Marvin J. Garbis
DATE FILED: 01/27/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/30/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/30/1999
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
    6 East 45th Street, Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), NY 10017
    310.209.2468 310.209.2087 · SSBNY@aol.com
  2. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York)
    270 Madison Avenue, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.545.4600 212.686.0114 · newyork@whafh.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Maryland
DOCKET #: 00-CV-00263
JUDGE: Hon. Marvin J. Garbis
DATE FILED: 07/14/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/30/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/30/1999
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles)
    10940 Wilshire Boulevard - Suite 2300, Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles), CA 90024
    310.209.2468 ·
  2. Tydings & Rosenberg LLP
    100 East Pratt Street, Tydings & Rosenberg LLP, MD 21202
    410.752.9700 410.757.5460 · webmaster@tydingslaw.com
  3. Weiss & Yourman (Los Angeles, CA)
    10940 Wilshire Blvd - 24th Floor, Weiss & Yourman (Los Angeles, CA), CA 90024
    310.208.2800 310.209.2348 · info@wyca.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date