Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 07/29/2016 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: August 01, 2013

According to the law firm press release, Vocera is a provider of mobile communication products and services based in San Jose, California. The Company offers software applications, hands-free wearable voice-controlled communication badges, smartphones, and other wireless devices to hospitals and to other enterprises where workers are highly mobile.

The securities class action charges that, in the Company's offering materials and throughout the Class Period, Vocera made a series of false and misleading statements concerning the Company's financial condition that caused the Company's shares to trade at an artificially inflated price.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that Vocera failed to disclose the severity of the negative impact that healthcare reform and federal budget sequestration were having on sales of the Company's communication products to hospitals.

On May 2, 2013, after the markets closed, Vocera shocked the investing public when it announced financial results for the first quarter 2013 that were significantly worse than expected. The Company reported revenue of $22.4 million, and non-GAAP earnings per share of $0.07, far below analysts' expectations and previously released guidance. The Company also sharply reduced its previously stated revenue guidance for full-year 2013, from between $120 million and $130 million, to between just $100 million and $110 million. Furthermore, the Company reduced its guidance for non-GAAP earnings per share from a profit of $0.33 to $0.51 to a loss of $0.06 and a profit of $0.18.

The complaint alleges that, in reaction to Vocera's May 2, 2013 announcement and earnings call, the price of Vocera common stock plummeted over 37% – closing at an all-time low of $12.15 per share on May 3, 2013, resulting in millions of dollars of losses to class members.

On November 20, 2013, the Court issued an Order consolidating related actions, appointing lead plaintiff, and approving lead counsel. Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on September 19, 2014.

On February 11, 2015, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motions to Dismiss.

On January 15, 2016, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement. This Settlement was preliminarily approved by the Court on March 4. On July 29, the Court granted final approval of the Settlement and entered judgment.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector:
Industry:
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: VCRA
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 13-CV-03567
JUDGE: Hon. Edward M. Chen
DATE FILED: 08/01/2013
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/28/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/03/2013
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Scott + Scott LLP (NY)
    405 Lexington Avenue, 40th Floor, The Chrysler Building, Scott + Scott LLP (NY), NY 10174
    (212) 223-6444 (212) 223-6444 ·
  2. Zeldes Haeggquist & Eck, LLP
    625 Broadway, Suite 1000, Zeldes Haeggquist & Eck, LLP, CA 92101
    619.378.0442 619.342.7878 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 13-CV-03567
JUDGE: Hon. Edward M. Chen
DATE FILED: 09/19/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/28/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/02/2013
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Francisco)
    100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Francisco), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
No Document Title Filing Date