Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 07/02/2007 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: August 29, 2003

On July 2, 2007, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order signed by U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman settling the action.

According to a press release dated July 31, 2007, on June 20, 2007, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied lead counsel's motion to submit its application for attorneys' fees in camera, finding that the counsel failed to show that justice required the records be reviewed under seal. The lead counsel in a securities fraud class action against Check Point applied for attorneys' fees and expenses with the court, seeking $3.35 million. The attorneys asserted that they spent over 550 billable hours for fact research, investigation and damage, over 300 billable hours filing the complaint and amending it, 400 billable hours for drafting and filing oppositions to motions to dismiss, and 275 billable hours reviewing documents and engaging in discovery. The lead counsel moved to submit their attorney's fees application in camera, asserting that the application contained privileged attorney work product. In camera review allowed if justice requires. The district court found that counsel failed to show that justice required an in camera review of the documents. The district court denied the motion for an in camera review of the attorney's fees application and instructed the lead counsel to redact protected portions of their application.

As summarized by the Company’s FORM 20-F For The Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2006, beginning on August 29, 2003, we received a number of class action complaints filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York by holders of our ordinary shares, alleging violations of the United States federal securities laws. On January 14, 2004, the court-appointed lead plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint on behalf of a putative class of all purchasers of ordinary shares between July 10, 2001 and April 4, 2002. The complaint generally alleges that we and certain of our senior officers made misrepresentations and omissions regarding, among other things, our sales and future prospects. We retained counsel and filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On March 7, 2005 the District Court granted our motion to dismiss but permitted the lead plaintiffs to file an amended complaint to attempt to cure the defects in the dismissed complaint. On September 2, 2005, we filed a motion to dismiss this complaint. On April 25, 2006, the court denied our motion to dismiss. On December 20, 2006, we reached an agreement-in-principle with the lead plaintiffs to settle this matter. We expect that the settlement of $13 million will be paid by our insurance carrier. The settlement is subject to the completion of appropriate documentation and to court approval. Also on December 20, 2006, the lead plaintiffs dismissed without prejudice the senior officers named as defendants in the lawsuit.

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. Throughout the Class Period, as alleged in the complaint, defendants issued numerous statements concerning Check Point’s revenue growth, product and marketing initiatives, and increasing revenues and profits while failing to disclose that demand for the Company’s products was materially declining. When this information was belatedly disclosed to the market on April 4, 2002, shares of Check Point fell over 24% on extremely heavy trading volume.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming
Headquarters: Israel

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CHKP
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-06594
JUDGE: Hon. Richard M. Berman
DATE FILED: 08/29/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/10/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/04/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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 ·
  2. Chitwood & Harley LLP
    1230 Peachtree Street, N.E., 2300 Promenade II, Chitwood & Harley LLP, GA 30309
    888.873.3999 404.873.4476 · info@chitwoodlaw.com
  3. Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP
    100 Park Avenue, Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, NY 10017
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@glrslaw.com
  4. Holzer Holzer & Cannon, LLP
    1117 Perimeter Center West, Suite E-107 , Holzer Holzer & Cannon, LLP , GA 30338
    888.508.6832 · holzerlaw@aol.com
  5. 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
  6. Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Lawrence)
    335 Central Avenue, Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Lawrence), NY 11559
    516.374.0707 516.295.3473 · securitiesfraud@comcast.net
  7. 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 ·
  8. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
  9. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  10. Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC
    35 East State Street, Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC, PA 19063
    877.891.9880 · jshah@classactioncounsel.com
  11. Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego)
    1818 Market Street, Suite 2500, Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego), PA 19103
    215.496.0300 215.496.6611 ·
  12. 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
  13. The Emerson Firm
    2228 Cottondale Avenue, Suite 100, The Emerson Firm, AR 72202
    800.663.9817 501.907.2556 · epllp@emersonpoynter.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 03-CV-06594
JUDGE: Hon. Richard M. Berman
DATE FILED: 04/27/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/10/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/04/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), NY 10119
    212.594.5300 212.868.1229 · info@milbergweiss.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. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
  4. Rabin, Murray & Frank LLP
    275 Madison Avenue, Rabin, Murray & Frank LLP, NY 10016
    212-682-1818 · info@rabinlaw.com
  5. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  6. Schiffrin Barroway Topaz & Kessler, LLP (Radnor)
    280 King of Prussia Road, Schiffrin Barroway Topaz & Kessler, LLP (Radnor), PA 19087
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbtklaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date