Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 07/08/2009 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: January 19, 2007

The original complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws, Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, including allegations of issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market which had the effect of artificially inflating the market price.

On July 2, 2007, a Class Action Amended Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws was filed. On August 16, 2007, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint, and on March 4, 2008, the Court issued the order denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss. On August 29, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed a motion for class certification. On December 31, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed a Stipulation of Settlement and motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. The proposed settlement is in the amount of $3,600,000 in cash.

On February 9, 2009, District Court Judge Samuel Conti granted the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. A Settlement Hearing will be held on June 26 2009, to determine whether the Settlement, as set forth in the Stipulation, should be approved as fair, just, reasonable and adequate. On July 8, 2009, Judge Conti approved the settlement, the plan of allocation and granted the motion for attorney fees. The action was dismissed with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Peripherals
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: SCUR
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 07-CV-00392
JUDGE: Hon. Samuel Conti
DATE FILED: 01/19/2007
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/04/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/11/2006
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City)
    120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City), OK 73102
    405-235-1560 · wfederman@aol.com
  2. Green Welling LLP (San Francisco,)
    595 Market Street, Suite 2750, Green Welling LLP (San Francisco,), CA 94105
    415.477.6700 415.477-6710 · gw@classcounsel.com
  3. Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Bala Cynwyd)
    273 Montgomery Ave. Suite 202, Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Bala Cynwyd), PA 19004
    610.660.8000 610.660.8080 · securitiesfraud@comcast.net
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 07-CV-00392
JUDGE: Hon. Samuel Conti
DATE FILED: 07/02/2007
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/04/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/11/2006
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City)
    120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City), OK 73102
    405-235-1560 · wfederman@aol.com
No Document Title Filing Date