Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 03/18/2008 (Settlement hearing date)

Filing Date: September 03, 2004

According to a press release dated April 7, 2008, a settlement for Five Million Six Hundred Thousand Dollars ($5,600,000) has been proposed. A hearing will be held before the Honorable Ed Kinkeade in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, United States Courthouse, 1100 Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas 75242, at 10:00 a.m., on June 16, 2008 to determine whether: (1) the proposed settlement should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable and adequate; (2) Co-Lead Counsel’s application for an award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses should be approved; (3) the application of the Lead Plaintiffs for their reasonable costs and expenses (including lost wages) relating to their representation of the Class should be approved; and (4) the claims against Defendants should be dismissed with prejudice.

On September 26, 2006, the Court entered the Memorandum Opinion and Order signed by U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade denying the defendants' motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint. According to the Order, the Court finds that Plaintiff's complaint sufficiently alleges a Section 10(b) fraud claim against Defendants with the requisite particularity. Further, Plaintiff's complaint also sufficiently alleges a Section 20(a) claim against Defendants with the requisite notice. The defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of the Memorandum Opinion and Order was denied on February 25, 2007.

On January 27, 2006, the Court entered the Order dismissing the case without prejudice as to two individual defendants pursuant to the notice of voluntary dismissal filed by the lead plaintiffs.

As disclosed by the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006, beginning in early September 2004, several purported shareholder class action lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas against the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors. These several class action lawsuits have been consolidated into one case. The Company has filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated lawsuits pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and also pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act.

The original complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants Zix and certain of its officers and directors disseminated materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and prospects. The defendants concealed from the investing public the following facts during the Class Period: (a) the Company was experiencing sluggish doctor adoption to e-prescribing; (b) the Company’s claim that it would achieve 1,000 deployed active doctors by the end of Q4 2003 was false and misleading because physicians would be required to reconfigure their patient data, obtain wireless coverage and implement a wireless LAN, which were severely undercutting physician acceptance and deployment; (c) the Company’s claim it had 4,000 deployments already on order was false because, at the time of claim, the physicians’ sites had not even been surveyed to evaluate wireless/LAN needs, all of which would drastically impact not only the timing of these “ordered” deployments but also whether these so-called ordered deployments would ever be truthfully ordered and deployed; and (d) new offerings from its Elron acquisition were delayed as a result of integration problems. As a result of the defendants’ false statements, Zix’s stock traded at inflated levels during the Class Period, increasing to as high as $17.33 on April 12, 2004, whereby the Company’s top officers and directors sold more than $4.6 million worth of their own shares and raised an additional $10 million through the conversion of warrants.

On May 4, 2004, the Company announced its results for Q1 2004, including larger loss than market expectations. On this news, the Company’s shares were sent into a freefall, tumbling 50% in the following trading days to below $7 per share.

NOTE: Zix is a global provider of e-messaging protection and transaction services.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ZIXI
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: N.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 04-CV-01931
JUDGE: Hon. Ed Kinkeade
DATE FILED: 09/03/2004
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/30/2003
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/04/2004
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. Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City)
    120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City), OK 73102
    405-235-1560 · wfederman@aol.com
  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. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
    401 B Street, Suite 1700, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    206.749.5544 206.749.9978 · info@lerachlaw.com
  5. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
  6. Provost & Umphrey Law Firm, LLP (Dallas )
    3232 McKinney Avenue, Suite 700, Provost & Umphrey Law Firm, LLP (Dallas ), TX 75204
    214.744.3000 214.744.3015 · info@provostumphrey.com
  7. Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
    330 Main Street, Schatz & Nobel, P.C., CT 06106
    800.797.5499 860.493.6290 · sn06106@AOL.com
  8. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  9. Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC
    35 East State Street, Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC, PA 19063
    877.891.9880 · jshah@classactioncounsel.com
  10. Wolf Popper, LLP
    845 Third Avenue, Wolf Popper, LLP, NY 10022-6689
    877.370.7703 212.486.2093 · IRRep@wolfpopper.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 04-CV-01931
JUDGE: Hon. Ed Kinkeade
DATE FILED: 10/28/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/30/2003
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/04/2004
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Claxton & Hill
    3131 McKinney Ave., Suite 700 LB 103, Claxton & Hill, TX 75204-2471
    214.969.9099 ·
  2. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
  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
No Document Title Filing Date