Mercury Interactive Corporation is a software company.

The original Complaint alleges that as late as April 28, 2005, Defendants increased their previous 2005 annual guidance, serving to affirm prior statements that the Company was continuing in a positive direction. Unbeknownst to investors, it is alleged that Defendants concealed auditing expenses during the class period.

The case was brought on behalf of all shareholders who purchased or acquired Mercury Interactive securities during the class period. This case is also brought on behalf of those purchasing notes convertible to shares of Company stock, pursuant to the Company's 0 Coupon Senior Convertible Notes (due 2008 offering).

As summarized by the Company’s FORM 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, beginning on or about August 19, 2005, several securities class action Complaints were filed against Mercury Interactive and certain current and former officers and directors, on behalf of purchasers of Company stock from October 2003 to November 2005. These class action lawsuits are consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California as In re Mercury Interactive Corporation Securities Litigation, Case No. C05-3395. The original actions were Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund, Inc. v. Mercury Interactive, et al (Case No. C05-3395), Johnson v. Mercury Interactive, et al. (Case No. 05-3864), Munao v. Mercury Interactive, et al. (Case No. C05-4031), and Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi v. Mercury Interactive, et al. (Case No. 05-5157). On May 5, 2006, the Court appointed the Mercury Pension Fund Group, represented by Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff LLP and Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, as lead Plaintiff and Counsel. The lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint on September 8, 2006. The Consolidated Complaint alleges, among other things, violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on allegations that Mercury Interactive and the individual Defendants and its auditors made false or misleading public statements regarding the Company's business and operations during the putative class period of October 17, 2000 to November 1, 2005, and seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief against the Defendants. The Company had not recorded any liabilities and were unable to estimate the potential liabilities.

On November 17, 2006, the Defendants filed several motions to dismiss the Plaintiffs' Consolidated Class Action Complaint.

According to a press release dated August 2, 2007, the latest ruling came Monday, when San Jose federal judge Jeremy Fogel dismissed with leave to amend a securities class action against former managers and the Company — now owned by Hewlett-Packard — as overly broad. Fogel had already dismissed federal shareholder derivative claims against the Company. Among the problems Fogel found with the securities Complaint was that Plaintiffs had inadequately argued that the Defendants acted knowingly or with deliberate recklessness. Fogel also found Plaintiffs hadn't stated a specific enough amount of loss that shareholders had suffered as a result of share-price drops. … Plaintiffs were given 30 days to file their amended Complaint.

On August 27, 2007, a Stipulation and Order was filed extending the filing of the Amended Complaint to September 26, 2007.

According to a news article released June 2, 2008, preliminary approval to a $117.5 million settlement has been granted. Mercury Interactive first agreed to the multimillion-dollar settlement with its investor clients — the Mercury Pension Fund Group — last October. At the time, it was one of the largest such deals in any stock options backdating case.