Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 10/14/2005 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: March 13, 2003

According to the docket posted, on October 14, 2005, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal signed by U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl. The action was settled.

By the Summary Notice dated June 29, 2005, a hearing shall be held on October 7, 2005, to determine whether an order should be entered: (i) finally approving the proposed settlement of the claims asserted by Plaintiffs in the captioned consolidated class action against Defendants, for the sum of $1,900,000 in cash pursuant to the terms set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated as of June 6, 2005; (ii) dismissing the Litigation with prejudice as to the Defendants; (iii) approving the Plan of Allocation of the Net Settlement Fund; and (iv) awarding fees and reimbursement of expenses to counsel for Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class.

The original Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between February 12, 2002 and July 8, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Caminus' securities. Specifically, as alleged in
the Complaint, defendants issued numerous statements regarding the
Company's future prospects and describing how demand for the Company's
products continued to be strong. As alleged in the Complaint, these
statements were each materially false and misleading because defendants
failed to disclose and misrepresented, among other things, the following
material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly
disregarded by them: (a) that the Company's business was coming under
increasing pressure as many of Caminus' clients were deferring product
purchases and/or determining not to proceed at all with planned
purchases; (b) that the Company's strategic consulting business was not
performing to the Company's expectations and would not be able to
contribute the revenues and earnings that were anticipated; and (c) that
the market for Caminus' products was quickly deteriorating as many
energy companies were being heavily scrutinized by regulatory
authorities, experiencing declining financial condition and grappling to
fix the deficiencies in their respective businesses. Moreover, energy
trading - an area where Caminus provided software systems - was in steep
decline as many of the major players exited the field amid scandal.
On July 8, 2002, the last day of the Class Period, Caminus shocked the
market when it announced that revenues for the second quarter would be
$7 million less than previously promised and that the Company now would
experience a loss, as compared to the $0.03 per share profit previously
represented. The Company attributed the earnings shortfall to "delays in
timing of several sizeable software deals ...." The market's reaction to
this announcement was immediate and punitive, with shares of Caminus
common stock falling from $5.95 per share to $2.99 per share, on
extremely heavy trading volume.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CAMZ
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 03-CV-1743
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 03/13/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/12/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/08/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Brian Felgoise
    230 South Broad Street, Suite 404 , Brian Felgoise, PA 19102
    215.735.6810 215/735.5185. ·
  2. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York)
    200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
  3. 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
  4. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY), NY 10119-1065
    212.594.5300 ·
  5. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 03-CV-1743
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 10/07/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/12/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/08/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville)
    200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 · info@lerachlaw.com
  2. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY), NY 10119-1065
    212.594.5300 ·
  3. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date