Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 03/20/2015 (Other)

Filing Date: January 12, 2015

According to the law firm press release, InvenSense designs, develops, markets and sells Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems ("MEMS") sensors, such as accelerometers, gyroscopes and microphones for consumer electronics. The Company targets sales of its products to manufacturers of smartphones and tablets, console and portable video gaming devices, and other types of consumer electronics.

The Complaint alleges that defendants concealed the adverse effects the Company would experience as a result of its agreement with Apple to supply sensors for the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus at heavily discounted prices. The low prices charged had negatively impacted, and would continue to negatively impact, InvenSense's margins. Instead of revealing the Company's true financial condition and prospects, defendants concealed these adverse facts from investors and chose to issue strong guidance. As a result of defendants' false and misleading statements and/or omissions, InvenSense common stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $25.85 per share, allowing certain of the Company's insiders to sell their personally held stock at artificially inflated prices for aggregate proceeds of over $5.3 million.

On October 28, 2014, the Company announced disappointing financial results for the second quarter of fiscal year 2015, ended Sept. 28, 2014. Net revenue for the second quarter fiscal 2015 was $90.2 million, up 35 percent from $66.7 million for the first quarter fiscal 2015. Gross margin determined in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for the second quarter of fiscal 2015 was 35 percent, compared with 47 percent for the first quarter of fiscal 2015 included stock-based compensation and related payroll taxes, and amortization of acquisition intangibles.

On this news, shares of InvenSense fell $5.10 per share, or more than 23.74%, to $16.08 per share on October 29, 2014.

On March 2, 2015, the Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed this case.


Sector: Technology
Industry: Semiconductors
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: INVN
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 #: 15-CV-00142
JUDGE: Hon. Vince Chhabria
DATE FILED: 01/12/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/28/2014
  1. Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles)
    1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles), CA 90067
    310.201.915 310. 201-916 ·
  2. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 ·
No Document Title Filing Date