Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 07/28/2003 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: September 20, 2001

According to a press release dated July 30, 2003, a federal judge in California has dismissed a shareholder class-action suit against Intel Corp. U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel ruled the suit failed to establish Intel had intended to deceive or defraud investors in making statements about its revenue and product plans in the summer of 2000. Because the plaintiffs already had one chance to amend their complaint to meet similar objections, the judge ruled they cannot re-file another amended complaint. The suit was led by the Hawaii Reinforcing Iron Workers Pension Trust Fund.

The original complaint charges Intel with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that as a result of Intel's extraordinarily bullish statements and assurances during 7/00-8/00, on 8/28/00, Intel's stock hit its all-time high of $75-13/16. But the positive statements about the strong demand for Intel's products, Intel's improved manufacturing processes and efficiencies, the successful development and introduction of its Pentium III microprocessor, the successful development of the Pentium IV, Itanium and Timna chips and the outlook for Intel's 3rdQ 00 results, issued from 7/18-19/00 through the Intel Developer Forum, were false. On 9/29/00, Intel admitted it was canceling its Timna chip (due to technical development problems and a lack of market demand) and told customers it was delaying shipment of its Pentium IV and Itanium chips due to design and development problems. Intel's stock dropped, falling to as low as $35-3/8. Thus, in just over five weeks, Intel's stock dropped from its all-time high of $75-13/16 on 8/28, to its lowest price in years, $35-3/8, a market cap loss of $271 billion, wiping out 50% of Intel's stock value.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Semiconductors
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: INTC
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 #: 01-CV-20888
JUDGE: Hon. Richard Seeborg
DATE FILED: 09/20/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/19/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/29/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bull & Lifshitz
    18 East 41st St., Bull & Lifshitz, NY 10017
    212.213.6222 212.213.9405 ·
  2. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR)
    P.O. Box 25438, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR), AR 72221-5438
    501.312.8500 501.312.8505 ·
  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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 01-CV-20888
JUDGE: Hon. Richard Seeborg
DATE FILED: 11/21/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/19/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/29/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbin (San Francisco)
    100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbin (San Francisco), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 · info@lerachlaw.com
  2. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
    401 B Street, Suite 1700, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    206.749.5544 206.749.9978 · info@lerachlaw.com
  3. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (S.F., CA)
    100 Pine Street - Suite 2600, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (S.F., CA), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
  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
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date