Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 10/22/2013 (Other)

Filing Date: August 30, 2011

According to a press release dated August 30, 2011, the defendants violated federal securities laws when they mislead investors through public statements.

Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that, among other things, the Company overstated demand for its products in its European markets throughout the Class Period. The lawsuit further alleges the Company concealed difficulties it was facing maintaining customers after the initial installation of its products. If you purchased BCSI common stock during the Class Period, you have the legal right to petition the Court to be appointed a "lead plaintiff." A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Any such request must satisfy certain criteria and be made no later than October 31, 2011. Any member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

On December 9, 2011, the Court issued an order appointing lead plaintiff and approving the selection of lead counsel.

On February 17, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.

On January 25, 2013, the Court issued an order granting the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs were allowed to submit an amended complaint within thirty days of the order. Plaintiffs filed their amended complaint on February 25.

On September 23, 2013, the Court issued an Order granting the motion to dismiss with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Networks
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: BCSI
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-04293
JUDGE: Hon.Richard Seeborg
DATE FILED: 08/30/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/24/2009
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/27/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Dyer & Berens LLP
    303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 300, Dyer & Berens LLP, CO 80203
    303.861.1764 303.861.1764 ·
  2. Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC (Atlanta)
    200 Ashford Center North, Suite 300, Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC (Atlanta), GA 30338
    770.392.0090 770.392.0090 ·
  3. Scott & Scott LLP (San Diego)
    600 B Street, Suite 1500, Scott & Scott LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.233.4565 619.233.4565 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-04293
JUDGE: Hon.Richard Seeborg
DATE FILED: 02/17/2012
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/24/2009
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/27/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willis, P.C. (Philadelphia)
    1818 Market Street, Suite 2500, Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willis, P.C. (Philadelphia), PA 19103
    215.496.0300 215.496.6611 ·
  2. Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willis, P.C. (Washington, D.C.)
    1101 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 600, Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willis, P.C. (Washington, D.C.), DC 20004
    202.756.3600 202.756.3600 ·
No Document Title Filing Date