Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 10/31/2002 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: September 11, 2000

As reported by the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002, on December 17, 2001, the Company and individual defendants reached a settlement of this action. The plaintiff class will receive $2,750,000 in connection with the settlement, all of which will be funded by the Company’s insurance carrier. The District Court approved this settlement by its Order issued on October 30, 2002.

Earlier, according to the same SEC filing, a consolidated putative class action complaint was filed on February 21, 2001 against the Company and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division. In re NetSolve Incorporated Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. A00-CA-591 SS. Plaintiffs seek to represent a class comprised of purchasers of the Company’s common stock between April 18, 2000 and August 18, 2000 (“Class Period”). They allege that the defendants engaged in a fraudulent scheme by issuing false and materially misleading statements regarding the Company’s business during the Class Period. The Company moved to dismiss the complaint on March 8, 2001 for failing to state a claim under which relief could be granted and for failing to comply with the pleading requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 et seq. On August 15, 2001, the District Court granted this motion in part and denied it in part. The District Court dismissed claims against one officer of the Company and dismissed certain of the theories under which Plaintiffs alleged liability against the Company. However, the District Court let stand certain of the stated claims against the Company and certain of its officers.

The original complaint charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market between April 18, 2000 and August 18, 2000. For example the complaint alleges that on May 18, 2000, NetSolve Vice President Harry S. Budow provided an interview to Bloomberg Forum concerning the Company and its operations. During that interview, which was disseminated over the Bloomberg Newswire, defendant Budow represented that the Company would beat the $0.41 earnings estimate of two analysts that follow the Company and stated: "We've exceeded the estimates since we went public by 2 cents or more a quarter . . . There's no reason not to expect [it won't keep happening]. . ." The complaint alleges that these statements were materially false and misleading because, among other things, they failed to disclose that the Company was not performing according to its internal projections and was experiencing declining demand for its products and services. Then, on August 18, 2000, defendants revealed that the Company's growth rate was slowing dramatically and that analysts should lower their earnings estimates. In response to this information, the price of NetSolve common stock plunged from $12.625 per share to $7.625 per share--a decline of 38%. During the Class Period, certain NetSolve insiders sold their personally-held NetSolve common stock to the unsuspecting public generating aggregate proceeds of more than $3 million.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: NTSL
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: W.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 00-CV-591
JUDGE: Hon. Sam Sparks
DATE FILED: 09/11/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/18/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/18/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Cauley, Geller, Bowman, Coates & Rudman LLP (San Diego, CA)
    225 Broadway, Suite 1900, Cauley, Geller, Bowman, Coates & Rudman LLP (San Diego, CA), CA 92010
    619.702.7350 619.702.7351 ·
  2. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
    World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A., MD 21202
    410.332.0030 · pivenlaw@erols.com
  3. Leo W. Desmond
    2161 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 204, Leo W. Desmond, FL 33409
    561.712.8000 561.712.8000 · stocklaw@bellsouth.net
  4. 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
  5. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  6. 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: W.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 00-CV-591
JUDGE: Hon. Sam Sparks
DATE FILED: 02/21/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/18/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/18/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY), NY 10119-1065
    212.594.5300 ·
  2. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date