Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 09/25/2009 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: July 30, 2007

According to a press release dated August 18, 2007, a lawsuit seeking class action status was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of all persons (the "Class") who purchased the securities of Himax Technologies, Inc. ("Himax" or the "Company") pursuant to the Company's March 30, 2006 Initial Public Offering ("IPO"). The Complaint names the Company's Chief Financial Officer as a defendant.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, Defendant violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1934, and also breached his fiduciary duties. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Defendant made certain false and/or misleading statements in the Prospectus issued in connection with the Company's IPO. Furthermore, the Complaint alleges that the Prospectus failed to disclose that Himax's primary operations faced an imminent reduction in customer demand due to unusually high inventory levels being experienced by the Company's customers.

On February 4, 2008, Judge Dean D. Pregerson granted the motion to consolidated two related cases. The Himax Investor Group was named lead plaintiff and the law firms Rosen Law Firm P.A. and Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP was approved as co-lead counsel. Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Class Action Complaint on February 25, 2008. On August 4, 2008, Himax filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. That motion was joined by defendants Jordan Wu and Chan. The Court heard argument on November 24, 2008.

On February 6, 2009, the plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary approval of settlement. According to the Stipulation of Settlement, the proposed settlement amount is in the amount of $1,200,000. The proposed settlement was preliminarily approved on April 23, 2009. On July 28, 2009, Judge Dean D. Pregerson awarded plaintiffs' counsel attorneys' fees of 25% of the Settlement Fund of $1,200,000.00 and reimbursement of litigation expenses in the amount of $47,576.73. On September 25, 2009, Judge Pregerson signed the Order and Final Judgment approving the settlement and dismissing the action with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Semiconductors
Headquarters: Taiwan

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: HIMX
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 #: 07-CV-04891
JUDGE: Hon. Dean D. Pregerson
DATE FILED: 07/30/2007
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/30/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/30/2007
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Law Offices Of William F. Salle
    425 E. Colorado St., Suite 755, Law Offices Of William F. Salle, CA 91205
    818.543.1900 818.543.1550 · wfslaw@yahoo.com
  2. Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC
    35 East State Street, Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC, PA 19063
    877.891.9880 · jshah@classactioncounsel.com
  3. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New York)
    350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5508, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New York), NY 10118
    212.686.1060 212.202.3827 · lrosen@rosenlegal.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 07-CV-04891
JUDGE: Hon. Dean D. Pregerson
DATE FILED: 02/25/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/30/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/06/2006
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New York)
    350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5508, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New York), NY 10118
    212.686.1060 212.202.3827 · lrosen@rosenlegal.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date