As summarized by the docket, on May 10, 2005, the Court entered the Preliminary Approval Order regarding a settlement with the remaining, individual defendants. According to the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action dated May 23, 2005, the settlement fund was in the amount of $25.25 million. On July 22, 2005, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment signed by U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow.

On July 15, 2002, the Court entered the Order by Judge Arthur J. Tarnow granting the motion to appoint lead plaintiff, appointing Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A. as lead counsel and appointing Jaffe Raitt as local counsel. In September, October and November 2002, the various defendants filed motions to dismiss the plaintiffs' amended class action complaint. On July 23, 2003, the Court entered the Order granting in part and denying in part certain motions to dismiss. The Court granted the motion to dismiss by CIBC World Market Corporation and Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation. On August 8, 2003, the Court entered Judgment for CIBC World Market Corporation and Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation and against the plaintiffs. On December 23, 2003, a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement was filed regarding defendants Horst Kukwa-Lemmerz and Wienand Meilicke. On April 26, 2004, the Court entered the Order dismissing with prejudice and without costs defendants Horst Kukwa-Lemmerz and Wienand Meilicke. On April 28, 2004, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint. On June 7, 2004, the a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement was filed by plaintiffs and defendant KPMG LLP only. The settlement fund was in the amount of $23.5 million. On September 10, 2004, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment as to defendant KPMG LLP.

The original Complaint alleges that the Defendants made material false or misleading statements, and failed to disclose material information, in Offering Memoranda, Prospectuses, SEC filings, and other public statements during the Class Period. On September 5, 2001, and in subsequent press releases, Hayes announced that it would be restating its financial statements for fiscal years 1999 and 2000 and the related quarterly periods, and for the first quarter of fiscal 2001. These financial statements had been contained in the offering memorandum for the Senior Bonds and had been relied upon by Plaintiffs and Class members when deciding to purchase Hayes Bonds during the Class Period, both in the initial offering (with respect to the Senior Bonds) and in the secondary market (with respect to all of the Bonds). According to a Company press release, the restatements would "correct errors that the Company and its auditors, KPMG LLP, have identified in the accounting for certain items, and write down the value of certain impaired assets ..." The Chairman of the Company's audit committee was quoted as saying that "[t]hese accounting errors occurred because of a failure within certain parts of the Company to comply with sound and well-established accounting policies." After Hayes announced that it would restate its financial statements, the market value of the Bonds purchased by the Class members plunged dramatically. The Complaint asserts claims under Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act"), 15 U.S.C. section 77l; Section 15 of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. section 77o; Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), 15 U.S.C. section 78j(b) and Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5, promulgated thereunder; Section 18 of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. section 78r; and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. section 78t(a).