Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 01/08/2010 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: February 08, 2008

The original complaint charges SiRF and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. SiRF, through its subsidiaries, engages in the development and marketing of semiconductor and software products that are designed to enable location-awareness utilizing global positioning system and other location technologies worldwide.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company' s business and prospects. As a result of defendants' false statements, SiRF stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, permitting one of the defendants to sell $9.6 million worth of his SiRF stock at $24.18-$24.29 per share.

On February 4, 2008, after the market closed, the Company announced disappointing financial results for its fourth quarter and fiscal 2007. On February 5, 2008, SiRF' s stock collapsed $8.91 per share to close at $7.36 per share, a one-day decline of 54%.
According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) SiRF' s acquisition of Centrality Communications, Inc. was having an adverse impact on SiRF' s results due to the similar products sold by Centrality which were cannibalizing SiRF' s sales; (b) SiRF' s major customers were not placing orders at sufficient quantities for SiRF to meet the aggressive targets set by and for the Company; (c) Centrality' s System-on-Chip ("SoC") product line had lower gross margins than SiRF' s products and defendants knew that although the Centrality acquisition would increase revenues in the fourth quarter (as it did), it would also significantly lower SiRF' s gross margins (as it also did); (d) competitive pressures were having much more of an adverse impact on the Company than acknowledged by defendants, as SiRF' s customers were moving to cellular-enabled products which SiRF could not adequately compete with; (e) as of October 30, 2007, one month into the fourth quarter, fourth quarter gross margins would be down significantly because of the lower SoC product line margins; and (f) downward pricing pressures were accelerating and would lead to lower margins and earnings in future quarters.

On March 14, 2008, U.S. District Court Judge Maxine M. Chesney consolidated several related cases and established 08-CV-00856, In re SiRF Technology Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation, as the Master Docket. On May 27, 2008, the Court granted the motion to appoint the Police & Fire Retirement System of the City of Detroit as lead plaintiff and approved lead plaintiff’s choice of Kirby McInerney LLP as lead counsel. On July 28, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. The defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint.

According to an article dated July 28, 2009, a class of shareholders has asked a federal judge to approve a $2.9 million settlement with SiRF Technology Holdings Inc. in a suit stemming from steep stock losses following SiRF's acquisition of Centrality Communications Inc. In a motion filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the plaintiffs in the case asked Judge Maxine H. Chesney to provide preliminary approval of the deal as well as of a settlement class in the case. A hearing on the settlement is scheduled for Aug. 7.

On August 14, 2009, Judge Chesney preliminarily approved the settlement. The Final Approval Hearing was set for January 8, 2010. On January 8, 2010, Judge Maxine M. Chesney signed the Order and Final Judgment approving the settlement, approving the plan of allocation, and granted the motion for attorney fees and reimbursement of expenses. The action has been dismissed with prejudice.


Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: SIRF
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 #: 08-CV-00856
JUDGE: Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
DATE FILED: 02/08/2008
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/04/2008
  1. Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky (New York, One Pennsylvania Plaza)
  2. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
  3. Girard Gibbs LLP (San Francisco)
  4. Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles)
  5. Kenneth A. Elan (former NY)
  6. Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia) (former)
  7. Law Offices of Howard G. Smith
  8. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
  9. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
  10. Schiffrin Barroway Topaz & Kessler, LLP (Walnut Creek)
  11. Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles)
  12. WeissLaw LLP
  13. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 08-CV-00856
JUDGE: Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
DATE FILED: 07/28/2008
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/25/2008
  1. Kirby McInerney LLP (New York)
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date