Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 12/17/2013 (Stipulation and order of dismissal (voluntary dismissal))

Filing Date: June 19, 2013

According to the Complaint, Plaintiff, a holder of Geospace common stock, seeks injunctive relief requiring Geospace to comply with the “unbundling rules” promulgated by the United States 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). The unbundling rules require that shareholders be allowed to vote on each separate matter presented in a proxy for shareholder vote.

On June 14, 2013, Geospace filed a Schedule 14A Definitive Proxy Statement (the “Proxy”) and Proxy Card with the SEC in connection with the Special Meeting. 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 impermissibly attempting to force shareholders to cast a single vote on two fundamentally separate matters: (i) whether to re-approve a stock plan that has long expired, and thus provide the Company with the ability to once again validly grant stock awards to its executive officers and other key employees, and (ii) whether to ratify stock awards
previously granted in violation of the plan.

On December 16, 2013, the Plaintiff and Defendant stipulated and agreed that the Plaintiff’s claims were to be dismissed with prejudice.


Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil & Gas - Integrated
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: GEOS
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-01098
DATE FILED: 06/19/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/19/2013
  1. Farnan LLP
    919 N. Market Street, 12th Floor, Farnan LLP, DE 19801
    302.777.0300 302.777.0301 ·
  2. Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
    30 Broad Street, 15 1h Floor, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, NY 10004
    212.363.7500 212.363-7171 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available