Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 06/12/2009 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: March 24, 2009

According to a press release dated March 25, 2009. The Complaint charges that Insight and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws by making materially false statements. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose the following: (i) Insight was improperly accounting for trade credits; (ii) the Company's financial results were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; (iii) Insight lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (iv) as a result, the Company's financial statements were materially false and misleading.

On February 9, 2009, Insight revealed that it would restate its previously reported earnings as a result of its historical accounting treatment of aged trade credits. Insight also announced that it expects to restate financial statements included in the Company's most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended December 31, 2007, and in the Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the first three quarters of fiscal year 2008. On this news, shares of Insight fell $2.85 to close at $3.05 per share.

On June 12, 2009, the Plaintiff, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 41(a)(1), voluntarily dismissed action without prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Misc. Financial Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: NSIT
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: D. Arizona
DOCKET #: 09-CV-00589
JUDGE: Hon. David K Duncan
DATE FILED: 03/24/2009
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/30/2007
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/06/2009
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 Shuman Law Firm (former Denver)
    885 Arapahoe Avenue, The Shuman Law Firm (former Denver), CO 80302
    303.861.3003 303.861.3003 ·
  3. Tiffany & Bosco, P.A.
    Third Floor Camelback; Esplanade II; 2525 East Camelback Road, Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., AR 85016-4237
    602.255.6000 602.255.6000 · general@tblaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date