Supportsoft, Inc. provides enterprise software.

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. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Defendants issued a series of false and misleading statements to the market during the Class Period. These statements were false and misleading because the Company failed to disclose that its business model was in fact not materially differentiated from other enterprise software companies, that its customers were implementing additional hurdles to contract approvals and that it was experiencing execution difficulties.

The Complaint further alleges that on October 4, 2004, the Company announced its preliminary financial results for the third quarter 2004, ended September 30, 2004. The Company announced that it expected total revenues for the third quarter 2004 to be in the range of $11.9 million to $12.3 million as compared to $13.5 million for the same period the prior year. The Company claimed that "tightness in IT spending" and "more complex approval processes" was the reason for the significant miss. On this news, the Company's share price dropped from $9.62 per share to $6.21 per share, representing a drop of 35.4% on extremely heavy trading volume.

In a press release dated April 15, 2005, by the order dated March 21, 2005, Goodkind Labaton was appointed by the Court to serve as co-lead Counsel for the Class in the now consolidated action In re SupportSoft Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 04-CV-5222 (N.D. Cal.). Goodkind Labaton continued to conduct an extensive investigation into the allegations in the initial Complaint. The firm expected to file its amended Complaint by April 21, 2005.

By the Order dated July 15, 2005, the Court granted the Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Complaint with leave to amend. On August 19, 2005, the Plaintiffs filed an Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, and the Defendants responded with a motion to dismiss the Complaint. On November 19, 2005, the Court denied the Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint.

In a press release dated July 21, 2006, Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff LLP and Schatz & Nobel, P.C. announce that the Court has certified a Class Action to proceed on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of SupportSoft (Nasdaq:SPRT). Upon stipulation of the parties, the Court has ordered that the Action should proceed as a class action on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of SupportSoft from January 20, 2004 to October 1, 2004 (the "Class Period") and who were damaged thereby (the "Class"). Excluded from the Class are the Defendants, the officers and directors of SupportSoft at all relevant times, members of their immediate families and their legal representatives, heirs, successors or assigns and any entity in which any excluded person or entity has a controlling interest.

In a press release dated May 21, 2007, SupportSoft announced that the Company and lead Plaintiffs have reached an agreement in principle to settle the securities class action litigation, "In re SupportSoft, Inc. Securities Litigation", filed by shareholders who purchased SupportSoft securities between January 20, 2004 and October 1, 2004, as described in the Company's SEC filings, including its most recent Form 10-Q dated May 9, 2007. The agreement does not contain any admission of fault or wrongdoing on the part of the Company or the individual Defendants. The settlement is expected to be funded by insurance and is subject to the execution of a definitive settlement agreement and the approval of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

According to a press release dated August 1, 2007, a hearing was scheduled for September 28, 2007, before the Honorable Susan Illston at the United States Courthouse in San Francisco, California, for the purpose of determining (1) whether the proposed settlement of the claims in the Litigation for the sum of $10,700,000 in cash should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable and adequate; (2) whether, thereafter, this Litigation should be dismissed with prejudice as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement dated June 13, 2007, and the Claims asserted by Class Members in the Litigation released; (3) whether the Plan of Allocation is fair, reasonable and adequate and therefore should be approved; and (4) whether the application of Counsel for the Plaintiff and the Class for an award of attorneys' fees, and reimbursement of expenses incurred in connection with this Litigation, and the application of the Plaintiffs for reimbursement of expenses incurred in connection with this Litigation, should be approved.

On October 2, 2007, the Court entered the Order by U.S. District Judge Susan Illston grating the motion for settlement. On October 16, 2007, the Court entered the Order awarding fees to class Counsel and providing for reimbursement of expenses.