Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 06/05/2015 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: October 26, 2011

According to a press release dated October 27, 2011, the complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the Company's financial results were artificially inflated by virtue of the fact that the Company had concealed the loss of its exclusive contract with Apple Inc. ("Apple") to supply imaging sensors for Apple's celebrated iPhone. The allegations include that the Company failed to disclose that: (a) it had lost its lucrative, high-profile, and exclusive contract with Apple; (b) competition was eroding its "leadership position" in the smartphone industry; (c) delays in the development of its 8-megapixel product line were threatening its prospects; and (d) it lacked a reasonable basis for its statements about its bright prospects in the smartphone market.

On August 25, 2011, the Company announced its results for the fiscal first quarter of 2012 and provided guidance for the fiscal second quarter of 2012 that was well below analyst expectations. The Company also disclosed delays in the production of its new 8-megapixel product line. Based on the Company's disappointing guidance, analysts recognized that the Company would not be the exclusive producer of camera components for Apple's new, fifth generation iPhone, the iPhone 4S set for release in the fall of 2011. As a result of these revelations, the Company's stock declined $7.55 per share, or 30.4 percent, to close at $17.27 per share on August 26, 2011 on extraordinary trading volume.

On October 14, 2011, the iPhone 4S became available for sale and for disassembly. Based on a logo stamped on the inside of the camera sensor, experts determined that a competitor and not the Company had supplied the CMOS sensor for the iPhone 4S. In reaction to this news, the Company's stock fell $1.65 per share, or 9.3 percent, to close at $15.95 per share on October 14, 2011 on high trading volume.

On February 21, 2012, the Court issued an order consolidating related cases and appointing lead plaintiff and lead counsel.

On April 23, 2012, the Plaintiffs filed an amended and consolidated class action complaint.

On March 29, 2013, the Court issued an Order denying defendants' motion to dismiss.

On December 30, 2014, the parties entered a Stipulation of Settlement. This Settlement was preliminarily approved by the Court on March 4, 2015. Final Judgment was entered and this case dismissed on June 5.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Semiconductors
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: OVTI
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-05235
JUDGE: Hon.Ronald M. Whyte
DATE FILED: 10/26/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/27/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/13/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Andrus, Hood & Wagstaff, PC
    1245 Camellia Blvd., Suite 200, Andrus, Hood & Wagstaff, PC, LA 70508
    ·
  2. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-05235
JUDGE: Hon.Ronald M. Whyte
DATE FILED: 04/23/2012
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/27/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/06/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Barrack, Rodos & Bacine (San Diego)
    600 West Broadway, Suite 900, Barrack, Rodos & Bacine (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.230.0800 619.230.0800 ·
  2. Branstetter, Stranch & Jennings, PLLC
    227 2nd Avenue North, Branstetter, Stranch & Jennings, PLLC, TN 37201-1684
    615.254.8801 615.254.8801 ·
  3. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
No Document Title Filing Date