Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 12/12/2012 (Stipulation and order of dismissal (voluntary dismissal))

Filing Date: May 03, 2012

According to the law firm press release, the complaint charges Nokia and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Nokia provides telecommunications infrastructure hardware, software, and services worldwide.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants told investors that Nokia’s conversion to a Windows platform would halt its deteriorating position in the smartphone market. It did not. This became apparent on April 11, 2012, when Nokia disclosed that its first quarter performance would be worse than expected. Nokia expected its first quarter 2012 non-IFRS Devices & Services operating margin to fall by 3%, and projected first quarter 2012 Devices & Services net sales of €4.2 billion. It also disclosed a glitch in its newest Windows offering – the Lumia 900. Nokia had to immediately offer customers an automatic $100, making the phone essentially free.

As a result of this disclosure, the price of Nokia’s American Depositary Shares (“ADRs”) dropped over 16% in a single day.

On July 25, 2012, the Court issued an Order appointing lead plaintiff and approving the selection of lead counsel.

On December 11, 2012, the parties entered a Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal into the Court's docket, dismissing certain individual defendants from this action.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment
Headquarters: Finland

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: NOK
Company Market: New York SE
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 12-CV-03511
JUDGE: Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
DATE FILED: 05/03/2012
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/26/2011
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/10/2012
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville)
    58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
  2. The Shuman Law Firm
    885 Arapahoe Avenue, The Shuman Law Firm, CO 80302
    303.861.3003 303.861.3003 ·
No Document Title Filing Date