Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 03/15/2002 (Other)

Filing Date: January 25, 2000

According to the Company’s FORM 10-K For The Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2001, in February 2001, an amended complaint was dismissed with prejudice by the District Court, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed this dismissal.

As summarized by the docket posted, on May 3, 2000, the Court entered the Order by Judge Gary L. Taylor granting the plaintiff’s motion to be appointed lead plaintiff and for approval of his selection of law firms of Rabin & Peckel and the Law Office of Leo W. Desmond as co-lead counsel. On June 22, 2000, the plaintiff filed an Amended Class Action Complaint, and on August 7, 2000, the defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Amended Class Action Complaint. On October 30, 2000, the Court entered the Order granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint with leave to amend. On November 16, 2000, the plaintiff filed a Second Amended Class Action Complaint, and on December 18, 2000, the defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Second Amended Class Action Complaint.

The original Complaint alleges that Onyx and certain of its officers and directors violated section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing a series of false and misleading statements concerning, among other things, Onyx's reported financial results during the Class Period. In particular, it is alleged that the revenue, net income, and earnings per share reported in these financial statements were materially inflated by valuing certain assets of Onyx in a manner which violated GAAP and require restatement. The Complaint alleges that, as a result of these material false and misleading statements, Onyx's stock price was artificially inflated throughout the Class Period.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Consumer Financial Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ONYX
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 00-CV-00087
JUDGE: Hon. Gary L. Taylor
DATE FILED: 01/25/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/28/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/26/1999
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Rabin & Peckel LLP
    275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor, Rabin & Peckel LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@rabinlaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 00-CV-00087
JUDGE: Hon. Gary L. Taylor
DATE FILED: 11/16/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/28/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/26/1999
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond
    2161 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 204, Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond, FL 33409
    888.337.6663 · Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com
  2. Lionel Z. Glancy
    1801 Avenue of the Stars Suite 308, Lionel Z. Glancy, CA 90067
    310.201.9150 ·
  3. Rabin & Peckel LLP
    275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor, Rabin & Peckel LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@rabinlaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date