According to SEC documents, Fischer Imaging Corporation designs, manufactures, markets, and services specialty medical imaging systems.

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 disseminating materially false and misleading financial statements and press releases to the public concerning the Company's revenues and earnings. Further, the Complaint alleges that Defendants failed to timely correct the series of material falsehoods and misrepresentations disseminated to the market between February 14, 2001 and April 1, 2003, thereby artificially inflating the price of Fischer Imaging securities. On April 1, 2003, Fischer Imaging announced in a press release that based on a review being conducted by the Company and Ernst & Young, LLP, it was necessary that Fischer Imaging delay the filing of its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002. The Company announced that based on preliminary findings, it will be necessary to restate its financial statements for the first three quarters of 2002 and the years ending December 31, 2000 and 2001. On April 2, 2003, and as a result of the prior day's announcement, the share price of Fischer Imaging tumbled to close at $4.40, down 18.36% from the previous day's close of $5.39.

According to a press release dated March 7, 2005, Fischer Imaging announced that the United States District Court for the District of Colorado denied preliminary approval for the previously disclosed proposed settlement of the putative class action lawsuit brought by Plaintiffs The Sorkin, LLC and James K. Harbert. A hearing on motions to dismiss all claims was scheduled for May 6, 2005.

On June 21, 2005, the Court entered the Order signed by U.S. District Judge Richard P. Matsch granting the Defendants’ motions to dismiss the Amended Class Action Complaint. Judgment was entered and the Amended Complaint was dismissed without prejudice. On July 25, the Plaintiff filed a motion to clarify the June 21 Order, but the Judge denied the motion by the Order entered on August 1, 2005.