Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 08/10/2012 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: June 06, 2011

According to a press release dated June 7, 2011, the Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants failed to disclose that an important asset in China, Alipay, had been transferred at much less than market value. As a result of defendants' false statements, Yahoo's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, between April 19, 2011 and May 13, 2011, reaching a high of $18.65 per share on May 6, 2011. On May 10, 2011, Yahoo disclosed in its 10-Q for the first time that the Company's $1 billion investment in a strategic partnership with Alibaba Group Holdings Limited,("Alibaba") likely had been severely impaired by the misappropriation of Alibaba's most valuable asset, Alipay, an e-commerce payment system, from Alibaba to another private company controlled by Alibaba's Chairman, Jack Ma. On news of this partial disclosure, Yahoo's stock collapsed $1.30 per share. Subsequently, on Sunday, May 15, Yahoo issued a press release announcing negotiations to resolve all outstanding issues relating to Alipay. On this news, Yahoo's stock price fell an additional $0.74 to close at $15.85 on May 16, 2011 – a decline of 15% from its Class Period high of $18.65 per share.

On July 19, 2011, the Court issued an order consolidating the following cases under the current docket as related cases: 11-CV-02732 , 11-CV-03269, 11-CV-03286, 11-CV-03301, 11-CV-03302.

On August 18, 2011, the Court issued a further Order Relating case numbers 11-CV_3870 and 11-CV-2732.

On December 19, 2011, the Lead Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint for violations of the federal securities laws.

On August 10, 2012, the Court issued an Order granting the Defendants' motion to dismiss.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: YHOO
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 #: 11-CV-02732
JUDGE: Hon. Charles R. Breyer
DATE FILED: 06/06/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/19/2011
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/13/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia)
    John Wanamaker Building; 100 Penn Square East, Suite 450, Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia), PA 19107
    215.561.3600 215.561.3600 · susang@bernardmgross.com
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
  3. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Francisco)
    100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Francisco), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-02732
JUDGE: Hon. Charles R. Breyer
DATE FILED: 12/15/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/19/2011
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/29/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Francisco)
    100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Francisco), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date