Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 11/21/2002 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: October 19, 2001

According to the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2002, an amended consolidated complaint was filed on March 4, 2002. The amended consolidated complaint generally alleges violations of federal securities laws on behalf of individuals who allege that they purchased CTI's common stock during a purported class period between April 30, 2001 and July 10, 2001. The amended consolidated complaint sought an unspecified amount in damages on behalf of persons who purchased CTI stock during the purported class period. On April 22, 2002, CTI filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended consolidated complaint in its entirety. On September 30, 2002, the Court granted CTI's Motion to Dismiss the amended consolidated complaint. On November 8, 2002, the Court entered a final judgment dismissing the amended consolidated complaint with prejudice. On November 26, 2002, plaintiffs agreed to waive their right to appeal the judgment in exchange for CTI's agreement that each side bear its own costs and legal fees.

The original complaint was filed alleging defendants violated 10(b) and 20(a) the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued to the investing public false and misleading information that materially misstated the Company's condition and prospects. Moreover, the Company failed to disclose material information necessary to make its prior statements not misleading. Specifically, the complaint alleges that in 1998 Comverse issued $250,000,000 worth of Convertible Subordinated Debentures at 4.5% which were due 2005 and callable as early as July 2001. The Debentures were convertible, at the option of the holder, into shares of Comverse common stock or cash. However, by April 2001, the telecom industry had become severely depressed, the federal reserve continued to drop interest rates and the Company's stock price was steadily eroding. Repaying the Company's
outstanding debt by converting it into shares rather than paying cash
became a paramount concern for defendants. To effectuate this goal, defendants artificially inflated Comverse's stock price by issuing false and misleading statements regarding the Company's revenues and new customer wins. Days after announcing record results for the first quarter 2001, Comverse called for the redemption of its 4.5% Debentures giving bond holders until July 9, 2001 to convert their debt. A day after the redemption deadline, and in stark contrast to their prior representations, Comverse shocked the market by issuing earnings warnings on the next three quarters. The market reacted harshly to the news with shares of Comverse dropping 33% on heavy volume, reaching its lowest trading level since March 1999.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CMVT
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: E.D. New York
DOCKET #: 01-CV-06972
JUDGE: Hon. Allyne R. Ross
DATE FILED: 10/19/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/03/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/10/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
  2. Brian Felgoise
    230 South Broad Street, Suite 404 , Brian Felgoise, PA 19102
    215.735.6810 215/735.5185. ·
  3. Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania)
    11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania), PA 19004
    610.668.7987 610.660.0450 · esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com
  4. 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
  5. Leo W. Desmond
    2161 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 204, Leo W. Desmond, FL 33409
    561.712.8000 561.712.8000 · stocklaw@bellsouth.net
  6. Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles)
    10940 Wilshire Boulevard - Suite 2300, Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles), CA 90024
    310.209.2468 ·
  7. Weiss & Yourman (New York, NY)
    The French Building, 551 Fifth Ave., Suite 1600, Weiss & Yourman (New York, NY), NY 10126
    212.682.3025 212.682.3010 · info@wyca.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. New York
DOCKET #: 01-CV-06972
JUDGE: Hon. Allyne R. Ross
DATE FILED: 03/04/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/30/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/10/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
  2. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
    6 East 45th Street, Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), NY 10017
    310.209.2468 310.209.2087 · SSBNY@aol.com
No Document Title Filing Date