Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 01/14/2014 (Other)

Filing Date: December 04, 2013

According to the Complaint, on November 18, 2013 Star Scientific filed a Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A
(the “Proxy”) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) in connection with the Shareholder Vote on six Company proposals. In the Proxy, the Star Scientific board of directors (the “Board” or “Individual Defendants”) recommends that Star Scientific’s public shareholders vote to approve two amendments to the Company’s 2008 Incentive Award Plan (the “Plan”) to, (a) increase the number of shares available for issuance thereunder by 18,300,000 shares and (b) to increase the maximum number of shares of common stock that can be issued to any one participant in any one calendar year from 5,000,000 to 6,000,000 (“Proposal 4”).

The Complaint alleges that the Proxy, with regard to Proposal 4 violates the “unbundling rules” promulgated by the SEC. It is also alleged that the Proxy contains several material disclosure violations regarding the reasons for, consideration and effects of Proposal 4, including how, and at what rate, the Plan may dilute Star Scientific’s public shareholders.

On January 8, 2014, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) the Plaintiff dismissed this action with prejudice, and without prejudice to any other individual or class claim in this action.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Consumer Non-Cyclical
Industry: Personal & Household Products
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: STSI
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-01994
JUDGE:
DATE FILED: 12/04/2013
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/18/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/04/2013
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York)
    685 3rd Avenue 26th Floor, Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York), NY
    212..983.9330 212..983.9331 ·
No Document Title Filing Date