Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 12/02/2004 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: April 07, 2000

According to the docket, on September 16, 2004, the Court entered the Amended Preliminary Approval Order in connection with settlement proceeds. On December 2, 2004, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton. The case was terminated.

Earlier, on May 3, 2002, Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton granted the motion to dismiss the second amended class action complaint and the case was dismissed with prejudice. The plaintiffs soon after filed a Notice of Appeal, and on November 18, 2003, the Court entered the certified copy of the Order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remanding the matter back to the District Court.

The original complaint charges Pacific and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that while defendants were publicly reporting profits of more than $10.1 million for Pacific's first, second and third quarters of 1999, defendants used Pacific common stock to acquire the assets of Robo Tel, Inc. and attempted to use its stock to fund its most important acquisition ever, the acquisition of NOS Communications, Inc., just weeks before revelations of accounting fraud had surfaced. The complaint further alleges that as Pacific continued to report profits and defendants created the fiction that Pacific had earnings per share of $0.22, $0.13 and $0.18, respectively, in the first, second and third quarters of 1999, which defendants later admitted were false, the price of Pacific stock reacted, rising to a Class Period high of $44-5/8. Defendants sought to profit from Pacific's fictional record profits and purported growth and sold over 31,000 shares during the Class Period for proceeds of $1.1 million. After the market had closed, on March 31, 2000, Pacific shocked investors, revealing that it would restate its first, second and third quarter earnings for 1999. This revelation caused Pacific stock to plummet to $10-1/4 per share, a decline of 75% from its Class Period high the following trading day. Pacific's shares continued their descent to $7-1/2 in the days that followed.

NOTE: PGEX filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of California under Chapter 11 on December 29, 2000 and is not included as a defendant.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Communications Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: PGEX
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 00-CV-1211
JUDGE: Hon. William H. Alsup
DATE FILED: 04/07/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/13/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/31/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP (former New York, NY)
    805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP (former New York, NY), NY 10022
    212.687.1980 212.687.7714 · info@kaplanfox.com
  2. Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy
    265 Llwyds Lane, Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy, FL 32963
    561.231.4202 ·
  3. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA)
    600 West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA), CA 92101
    800.449.4900 · support@milberg.com
  4. Rabin & Peckel LLP
    275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor, Rabin & Peckel LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@rabinlaw.com
  5. 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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 00-CV-1211
JUDGE: Hon. William H. Alsup
DATE FILED: 09/26/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/14/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/31/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (CA)
    425 California Street, Suite 2025, Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (CA), CA 94104
    415.433.3200 415.433.6382 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date