Interlink Electronics Inc.("Interlink" or the Company) develops, manufactures, markets, and sells intuitive interface devices and components, such as wireless remote controls, for business and home applications.

Several purported shareholder class action lawsuits have been filed against Interlink 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. 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%.

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.

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. On September 26, the Court 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 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 then moved to the discovery phase.

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 Settlement on February 9, 2009. On June 1, the Court granted final approval of the Settlement, including an award of Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses, and entered Final Judgment.