Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 03/18/2009 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: November 15, 2005

Parties agreed to settle the action and a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement was filed on January 29, 2009. The judge granted preliminary approval of the $5 million deal on February 9, 2009. A settlement fairness hearing has been scheduled for June 1.

On May 14, 2008 plaintiffs filed the their Second Amended Complaint, which the defendants moved to have dismissed on June 30, 2008. The judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, denying the defendants' motions for dismissal on October 6, 2008. The case will now go into the discovery phase.

After the consolidation order, the plaintiffs filed an Amended Class Action complaint on January 17, 2007 and defendants replied with a motion to dismiss on February 22, 2007. The judge granted in part, and denied in part, the defendants' motion for dismissal and provided plaintiffs 21 days to file an amended complaint addressing pleading deficiencies.

On November 6, 2006, the Court entered the Stipulation and Order by U.S. District by Judge Andrew J. Guilford appointing Brij Bhargava and Bill Green as lead plaintiffs and appointing Stull Stull & Brody and Brower Piven as plaintiffs’ lead counsel. According to the Order, the matter shall be identified as In re Interlink Electronics Inc. Securities Litigation and the files shall be maintained under CV 05-8133.

Several purported shareholder class action lawsuits have been filed against Interlink Electronics Inc. and certain of the Company's executive officers charging the defendants with violations of federal securities laws. Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and dissemination of materially false and misleading statements concerning Interlink's financial performance caused the Company's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors. Interlink develops, manufactures, markets, and sells intuitive interface devices and components, such as wireless remote controls, for business and home applications. The Complaint alleges that defendants made repeated Class Period representations concerning the Company's performance and prospects which were materially false and misleading as a result of the Company's improper accounting practices and weak accounting controls.

The complaint further alleges that on or around March 9, 2005, Interlink publicly announced it would restate its financial results for the first three quarters of 2004 to correct several instances of improper accounting. Then, on November 2, 2005, Interlink shocked investors by announcing it was again restating its financial statements -- this time for all of 2003 and 2004 and for the first two quarters of 2005 -- wiping out previously reported earnings. This news sent Interlink shares plummeting in value by 40%.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Peripherals
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: LINK
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 05-CV-08133
JUDGE: Hon. George P. Schiavelli
DATE FILED: 11/15/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/24/2003
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/01/2005
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania)
    11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania), PA 19004
    610.668.7987 610.660.0450 · esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com
  2. Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City)
    120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City), OK 73102
    405-235-1560 · wfederman@aol.com
  3. Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles)
    1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles), CA 90067
    310.201.915 310. 201-916 · info@glancylaw.com
  4. Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C.
    Esquire at 261 Old York Road, Suite 423, Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C., PA 19046
    215.886.1900 · securitiesfraud@comcast.net
  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. Roy Jacobs & Associates (New York)
    350 Fifth Avenue Suite 3000 , Roy Jacobs & Associates (New York), NY 10118
    · classattorney@pipeline.com
  7. 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
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 05-CV-08133
JUDGE: Hon. George P. Schiavelli
DATE FILED: 05/14/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/24/2003
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/01/2005
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Brower Piven (Baltimore)
    The World Trade Center-Baltimore. 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Brower Piven (Baltimore), MD
    410.332.0030 410.685.1300 · info@browerpiven.com
  2. Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles)
    10940 Wilshire Boulevard - Suite 2300, Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles), CA 90024
    310.209.2468 ·
No Document Title Filing Date