Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 06/11/2002 (Other)

Filing Date: August 02, 2001

According to the docket, on June 11, 2002, the Court entered the Stipulation and Order of Voluntary Dismissal. Pursuant to Rules 41(a) and 23(e) of the FRCP, plaintiffs dismiss the action, and all claims against the defendants, without prejudice and without costs to any party. The case is closed.

On April 19, 2002, the Court issued an Amended Stipulation and Order of dismissal of the action pursuant to Rules 41(a) and 23(e) of the FRCP as to defendants Credit Suisse First Boston Corp., The Goldman, Sachs Group, Inc., Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., Bancboston Robertson Stephens, Inc. and Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. without prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs.

On September 5, 2001, the Court issued the Order finding that cases involving Internet in the IPO Securities Litigation shall be consolidated into case number 01-CV-2858. The Clerk of the Court was ordered to close all cases that have been consolidated, subject to re-opening at a later date. On October 3, 2001, the Court issued a Notice reassigning the case to Judge Shirley W. Kram and the case was reopened.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by artificially inflating the prices of Class Securities, to defendants' benefit, by systematically issuing research reports (including favorable "buy" recommendations) which contained the same uniform omissions of material facts, including: (a) the alleged material fact that the internal operations of defendants effectively mandated that defendants' analysts issue a favorable recommendation as an adjunct to defendants' obtaining (and their analysts' directly or indirectly sharing in) investment banking fees and other fees and business from the issuer of a Class Security; and (b) the alleged material fact that defendants and their employees, including analysts, frequently acquired shares of class securities at a fraction of the price that public investors later paid therefor and would profit from research reports that enabled the analyst, his or her employer, and his or her co-workers to sell their holdings at generally higher prices.

The complaint also alleges that defendant Merrill Lynch violated the Securities Act of 1933 because the Prospectus distributed to investors and the Registration Statement filed with the SEC in order to gain regulatory approval for the Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs offering failed to disclose that the prices of the HOLDRs constituent securities had been artificially inflated by defendants' misleading research reports and recommendations as set forth above.

Note: This Class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of all investors that during the class period acquired securities from the following issuers:

- Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs (AMEX:IIH),
- Exodus Communications, Inc (NasdaqNM:EXDS),
- Inktomi Corp. (NasdaqNM:INKT),
- Vitria Technology, Inc. (NasdaqNM:VITR),
- Software.com (formerly listed as NasdaqNM:SWCM, now known as Openwave Systems, Inc. (NasdaqNM:OPWV)),
- E.piphany, Inc. (NasdaqNM:EPNY)

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Money Center Banks
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: IIH
Company Market: American SE
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 01-CV-7161
JUDGE: Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
DATE FILED: 08/02/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/01/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/01/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Beatie & Osborne LLP
    599 Lexington Avenue, 42nd Floor, Beatie & Osborne LLP, NY 10022
    212.888.9000 212.888.9664 ·
  2. Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP
    100 Park Avenue, Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, NY 10017
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@glrslaw.com
  3. Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP (former New York)
    500 Fifth Avenue, Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP (former New York), NY 10110
    212.608.1900 212.719.4677 · info@lshllp.com
  4. Sirota & Sirota LLP
    110 Wall Street 21st Floor, Sirota & Sirota LLP, NY 10005
    888.759.2990 212.425.9093 · Info@SirotaLaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 01-CV-7161
JUDGE: Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
DATE FILED: 04/29/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/01/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/01/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP (former New York)
    500 Fifth Avenue, Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP (former New York), NY 10110
    212.608.1900 212.719.4677 · info@lshllp.com
No Document Title Filing Date