Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 03/04/2015 (Other)

Filing Date: May 24, 2013

According to the Complaint, Plaintiffs, holders of Groupon common stock, seek injunctive relief requiring Groupon to comply with the "unbundling rules" promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") under Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the "Exchange Act"), including SEC Rules 14a-4(a)(3) and 14a-4(b)(1) promulgated thereunder. The unbundling rules require that shareholders be allowed to vote on each separate matter presented in a proxy for shareholder vote.

On April 29, 2013, Groupon issued a Schedule 14A Definitive Proxy Statement (the "Proxy") and Proxy Card in connection with the Annual Meeting, which is scheduled for June 13, 2013.

The Complaint alleges that the Proxy and Proxy Card violated the SEC's unbundling rules set out in Rules 14a-4(a)(3) and 14a-4(b)(1) under the Exchange Act by aggregating two separate and unrelated amendments to Groupon's 2011 Incentive Plan (the "Plan"), one of which seeks shareholder ratification of an ultra vires act by the Board, thus impermissibly attempting to force shareholders to cast a single vote on fundamentally separate matters.

Pursuant to a Stipulation of the parties, this case was ordered dismissed on September 17, 2013.


Sector: Services
Industry: Retail (Specialty)
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: GRPN
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: D. Delaware
DOCKET #: 13-CV-00940
JUDGE: Hon. Gregory M. Sleet
DATE FILED: 05/24/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/24/2013
  1. Farnan LLP
  2. Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available