Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 05/20/2002 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: December 19, 2001

Pursuant to the Order entered on May 20, 2002, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken dismissed the case with prejudice. According to the Order, the Plaintiff moved to remand this class action to State court (Docket No. 9). Defendants opposed the motion, and also moved to dismiss the case as preempted (Docket No. 4). Before the hearing on the motions, the merger between Hewlett Packard Company and Compaq Computer Corporation, which this suit sought to enjoin, became final. Defendants then filed a supplemental brief suggesting that the case is moot, and argued that the case is moot at the hearing on April 26, 2002, submitting additional authorities to the Court. The Court agreed to consider Defendants’ motion to dismiss for mootness, and ordered further briefing by the parties. Plaintiff then filed a statement of non-opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for mootness. Accordingly, this matter is dismissed with prejudice.

The suit alleges that HP and certain officers and directors, violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the individual defendants violated their fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and candor to the detriment of HP's public shareholders. The suit seeks to prevent the transaction between HP and Compaq from closing until a corrective proxy statement has been issued, and until
the individual defendants re-evaluate Compaq's worth as a
merger/acquisition candidate, and to compensate shareholders for damages
suffered as a result of the acts alleged, the law firm said. It did not
provide details about the alleged SEC filing omissions.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Hardware
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: HWP
Company Market: New York 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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 01-CV-04983
JUDGE: Hon. Claudia Wilken
DATE FILED: 12/19/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/03/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/19/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
    P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut), CT 06415
    860.537.5537 860.537.4432 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date