ValueClick, Inc. describes itself as “one of the world’s largest integrated online marketing companies, offering comprehensive and scalable solutions to deliver cost-effective customer acquisition for advertisers and transparent revenue streams for publishers.”

The original complaint charges ValueClick and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants issued false and misleading statements concerning ValueClick’s sales growth, record reported revenues and earnings, strong business fundamentals, and upward earnings guidance. As a result of these false and misleading statements, ValueClick’s stock rose precipitously, reaching a Class Period high of over $35 per share by May 2007. Meanwhile, Defendants concealed from investors that ValueClick’s stellar financial performance was due in large part to illegal practices, which when halted (voluntarily or through a regulatory enforcement action) would adversely impact ValueClick’s lead-generation business, the Company’s revenues and its profits

The Complaint further alleges that on May 18, 2007, the Company announced that it was the target of an investigation by the FTC into potential FTC Act or CAN-SPAM Act violations. Yet Defendants maintained that ValueClick was in full compliance with the law and that the FTC investigation would not negatively impact the Company’s forward financial performance. Nonetheless, according to the Complaint, the Company’s promotional lead-generation business dropped off dramatically during May and June of 2007, significantly impacting the Company’s ability to achieve its inflated financial targets.

Then, on July 30, 2007, the Company reported second quarter 2007 earnings which fell short of Defendants’ forecasts. The Company also lowered its forward financial guidance for the year. On this news, ValueClick’s stock plummeted over $6 per share, falling below $20 per share in intraday trading, or 42% from its Class Period high, on very high volume.

According to the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009, on November 20, 2007, the United States District Court for the Central District of California consolidated two purported securities fraud class action lawsuits brought against the Company, its executive chairman and its former chief administrative officer. The court appointed the combined funds of Laborers’ International Union of North America National (Industrial) Pension and the LIUNA Staff & Affiliates Pension Fund (collectively, the “LIUNA Funds”) as lead Plaintiffs. In January, the LIUNA Funds filed a consolidated Complaint alleging violations of certain federal securities laws based upon the Company’s and the Company’s officers’ alleged materially false and misleading statements concerning the Company’s compliance with laws and standards applicable to its lead generation business, among other things. The LIUNA Funds purport to represent all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of the Company between June 13, 2005 and July 27, 2007, and seek class certification, damages, costs incurred in bringing suit, and equitable/injunctive relief. The Company filed a motion to dismiss this matter in March 2008 and on September 25, 2008, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss. After having their first Complaint dismissed by the Court, the LIUNA Funds filed their First Amended Consolidated Complaint on November 24, 2008. The Company has reached a preliminary settlement in this matter that is not material to the Company’s consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows. The settlement is still subject to court approval.

On June 30, 2009, Judge Dean D. Pregerson preliminarily approved the settlement in the amount of $10 million in cash. The Settlement Fairness Hearing was scheduled for November 9, 2009. On November 9, 2009, the hearing on the motion for final approval of the settlement was held. The Court heard oral argument and took the matters under submission. On November 25, 2009, the Court entered the Order granting the final approval of the settlement, approving the plan of allocation and also awarding attorneys’ fees in the amount of 25% of the settlement fund and reimbursement of expenses in the amount of $167,241.27.