Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 08/04/2015 (Other)

Filing Date: December 04, 2007

Several class action lawsuits have been filed on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired securities of VeriFone Holdings, Inc. The complaints allege that VeriFone and certain of its present and former officers violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially misleading statements regarding artificially high revenues. Specifically, the complaint alleges that on December 3, 2007, VeriFone announced that it was restating its financial statements for the first three fiscal quarters of 2007, and that the previous statements could no longer be relied upon. In reaction to this news, VeriFone’s share price fell by 45% --or $22 per share -- on nearly 35 times its average trading volume.

A similar, class action complaint has also been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

On February 5, 2008, the Court issued the Order signed by U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel consolidating several, similar class actions into Civil Action C 07-6140 MHP. The consolidated action shall be captioned: “In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation.” On August 22, 2008, Hon. Marilyn H. Patel named National Elevator Fund as lead plaintiff and Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP as lead counsel in consolidated litigation that consists of nine securities fraud class actions. On October 31, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint. The defendants responded by filings motions to dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint on December 31, 2008.

On May 26, 2009, the Court entered the Memorandum and Order signed by Judge Patel granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss with leave to amend. The plaintiffs have thirty days to file an amended complaint. On December 3, 2009, the plaintiff filed a First Amended Consolidated Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws. On January 19, 2010, the plaintiff again amended the complaint and filed a Second Amended Consolidated Complaint. On March 5, 2010, the defendants filed several motions to dismiss the Second Amended Consolidated Complaint.

On July 3, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a Proposed Third Amended Consolidated Complaint. On September 15, 2010, the plaintiffs filed the Third Amended Consolidated Complaint. The defendants responded by filing motions to dismiss on October 5, 2010.

According to an article dated March 8, 2011, a California federal judge on Tuesday tossed a consolidated securities class action against VeriFone Holdings Inc., saying shareholders had not shown that the company and its officers purposely inflated its income, causing stock prices to drop 46 percent when that information was publicized. Judge Marilyn Hall Patel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California approved the electronic payment services company's motion to dismiss the group of nine class actions.

An Amended Memorandum and Order was filed on March 22, 2011. On April 5, 2011, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal.

The parties entered into a Stipulation of Settlement on August 9, 2013. On October 15, the Court issued an Order preliminarily approving the Settlement. On February 25, 2014, the Court granted final approval of the Settlement and entered Final Judgment.


Sector: Technology
Industry: Office Equipment
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: PAY
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 07-CV-6140
JUDGE: Hon. Marilyn H. Patel
DATE FILED: 12/04/2007
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/30/2007
  1. Girard Gibbs LLP (San Francisco)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 07-CV-06140
JUDGE: Hon. Marilyn H. Patel
DATE FILED: 09/15/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/01/2008
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Francisco)
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date