Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 01/27/2009 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: September 18, 2006

The original Complaint alleges that JBL and certain officers and directors manipulated the prices of stock option grants and made materially false and misleading statements and/or omitted material facts necessary to make those statements not misleading. The Complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b), 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Sections 78j(b), 78n(a), and 78t(a) and Rules 10b-5 and 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. Sections 240.10b-5 and 240.14a-9.

On September 18, 2006, two similar actions were consolidated into a single proceeding and on January 18, 2007, the Court appointed The Laborers Pension Trust Fund for Northern California and Pension Trust Fund for Operating Engineers as lead plaintiffs in the action. On March 5, 2007, the lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated class action complaint. The Consolidated Class Action Complaint is purported to be brought on behalf of all persons who purchased the Company’s publicly traded securities between September 19, 2001 and December 21, 2006, and names the Company and certain of its current and former officers as defendants. The Consolidated Class Action Complaint alleged violations of Sections 10(b), 20(a), and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules promulgated thereunder. On April 30, 2007, the plaintiffs filed a First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint asserting claims substantially similar to the Consolidated Class Action Complaint it replaced but adding additional allegations relating to the restatement of earnings previously announced in connection with the correction of errors in the calculation of compensation expense for certain stock option grants. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint on June 29, 2007. The plaintiffs filed an opposition to the Company’s motion to dismiss, and the Company then filed a reply memorandum in further support of its motion to dismiss on September 28, 2007. On April 9, 2008, the court dismissed the First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint without prejudice and with leave to amend such complaint by May 12, 2008. On May 12, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Class Action Complaint and then a Third Amended Class Action Complaint on July 23, 2008. On August 6, 2008, the defendants filed two motions to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint.

On January 26, 2009, District Court Judge Steven D. Merryday issued the Order granting the defendants’ motions to dismiss and dismissed the Third Amended Complaint with prejudice. The Court entered judgment in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiffs.

On February 20, 2009, the lead plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal now pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. On April 28, 2009, the Court entered the Order from the U.S. Court of Appeals, dismissing the appeal with prejudice as to only Appellee, KPMG, LLP. According to the Order, the appeal shall continue unabated.

According to an article dated January 20, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of a securities class action against Jabil Circuit Inc. for failing to meet heightened pleading standards under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. On Tuesday, the appeals court upheld a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida to dismiss a case brought by investors.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Electronic Instruments & Controls
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: JBL
Company Market: New York SE
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: M.D. Florida
DOCKET #: 06-CV-01716
JUDGE: Hon. Elizabeth A. Jenkins
DATE FILED: 09/18/2006
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/19/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/21/2006
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C.
    One South Broad Street - Suite 2100, Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C. , PA 19107
    215.238.1700 215.238.1960 · info@kohnswift.com
  2. Malman, Malman & Rosenthal
    4040 Sheridan Street. Joe Dimaggio Building, Malman, Malman & Rosenthal, FL 33021
    954.322.0065 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: M.D. Florida
DOCKET #: 06-CV-01716
JUDGE: Hon. Elizabeth A. Jenkins
DATE FILED: 07/23/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/19/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/21/2006
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Boca Raton)
    120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33432
    561.750.3000 561.750.3000 ·
  2. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Francisco)
    100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Francisco), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date