Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 01/11/2011 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: September 16, 2010

According to the complaint filed on September 16, 2010, under the terms of the proposed transaction, Cogent shareholders will receive the inadequate consideration of $10.50 per share in a transaction totaling approximately $943 million, or approximately $430 million net of cash acquired.

As recently as August 5, 2010, the Company touted its excellent performance and growth potential in a press release announcing its financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2010. In this press release, the Company announced second quarter 2010 revenues of $25.4 million and net income (non- GAAP) for the second quarter of 2010 was $3.4 million.

In approving the Proposed Transaction, Cogent spurned an offer from a competing bidder worth between $11.00 to $12.00 per share. Despite such interest, the Board decided to enter into the Proposed Transaction for only $10.50 per share, a price that the Board had deemed insufficient on prior occasions. Such a blatant missed opportunity for increased consideration demonstrates the Board's failure to take all reasonable steps to maximize shareholder value.

On December 01, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint against Defendants.

On January 10, 2011, this action was dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1). All parties agreed to bear their own fees and costs.

On January 11, 2011, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed two of the defendants without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: COGT
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 #: 10-CV-06911
JUDGE: Hon. R. Gary Klausner
DATE FILED: 09/16/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/16/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/16/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Finkelstein Thompson LLP (San Francisco)
    100 Bush Street, Suite #1450, Finkelstein Thompson LLP (San Francisco), CA 94104
    415.398.8700 415.398.8700 · contact@finkelsteinthompson.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 10-CV-06911
JUDGE: Hon. R. Gary Klausner
DATE FILED: 12/01/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/16/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/16/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Finkelstein Thompson LLP (San Francisco)
    100 Bush Street, Suite #1450, Finkelstein Thompson LLP (San Francisco), CA 94104
    415.398.8700 415.398.8700 · contact@finkelsteinthompson.com
No Document Title Filing Date