Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 10/23/2009 (Date of stipulation and/or agreement of settlement)

Filing Date: November 01, 2007

According to a press release dated November 1, 2007, the Complaint charges that Isilon, and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws. Isilon completed its IPO of 8.9 million shares at $13.00 per share for net proceeds of approximately $105.7 million. According to the complaint, the Registration Statement failed to disclose the following: (i) the Company would not be able to reach profitability by the second half of 2007; (ii) Isilon's clustered storage solutions did not provide a competitively differentiated business model which would enable the Company to effectively compete against the dominant players in the traditional storage market; (iii) the Company's past results were not indicative of its future operations, its ability to continue to sustain quarter over quarter revenue growth, and its ability to manage its cost structure; and (iv) despite being able to grow and significantly diversify its overall customer base, the Company would remain highly dependent upon its largest customers, such as the Eastman Kodak Company.

On October 3, 2007, after the market closed, Isilon announced disappointing preliminary results for its third quarter 2007. On this news, Isilon's stock price collapsed from $7 per share on October 3, 2007 to close at $5.66 per share on October 4, 2007.

On February 04, 2008, the court ordered all actions will be consolidated into a single action under case number C07-1764MJP, entitled Dr. Magdy Fouad, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Isilon Systems, Inc., et al.. It was further ordered that Dr. Magdy Fouad was appointed individually as the lead plaintiff and Cohen Milstein were appointed lead counsel in the matter and Keller Rohrback were appointed liaison counsel.

On March 8, 2008, a Consolidated Complaint was filed against all defendants. The defendants responded by filing motions to dismiss on June 16, 2008. According to the Order dated December 29, 2008, fthe Court hereby denies Defendants’ request for dismissal of counts one, three and six, and grants in part the remaining requests for dismissal as follows: the Section 12(a)(2) claims in count two against Isilon, Fuhlendorf, and Goldman are dismissed; the claims in count four and count seven against Sequoia, Atlas, and Madrona are dismissed; and the Section 10(b) claims against Ruckelshaus and McIlwain are dismissed.

According to the Company's Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, on October 24, 2009, we filed a stipulation of settlement providing for the settlement and dismissal of the class action. On November 2, 2009, the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The settlement provides for a payment to the plaintiff class of $15.0 million, of which Isilon contributed $2.0 million and the balance was contributed by our insurers in December 2009. The amounts were paid into an escrow fund pending final court approval. The class action settlement is subject to final approval by the Court at a hearing scheduled for March 5, 2010.

On March 5, 2010, the Court granted final approval of the class action settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Storage Devices
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ISLN
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: W.D. Washington
DOCKET #: 07-CV-1764
JUDGE: Hon. Marsha J. Pechman
DATE FILED: 11/01/2007
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/14/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/03/2007
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 · info@csgrr.com/
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: W.D. Washington
DOCKET #: 07-CV-1764
JUDGE: Hon. Marsha J. Pechman
DATE FILED: 04/18/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/14/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/08/2007
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. (Washington, DC)
    1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 500, West Tower, Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. (Washington, DC), DC 20005
    202.408.4600 202.408.4699 · lawinfo@cmht.com
No Document Title Filing Date