Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 07/13/2016 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: July 13, 2016

According to the Complaint, on June 2, 2016, Qlik Technologies, Inc. (“Qlik” or the “Company”) issued a joint press release announcing that the Company had entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) to sell Qlik to Thoma Bravo, LLC (“Thoma Bravo”). Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Thoma Bravo will acquire all
outstanding shares of Qlik for $30.50 in cash per Qlik common share (the “Merger Consideration”). The Proposed Transaction is valued at approximately $3 billion. On July 6, 2016, Qlik filed a Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A (the “Proxy”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

The Complaint alleges the Proxy, which recommends that Qlik stockholders vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction, omits or misrepresents material information concerning, among other things: (i) the valuation analyses prepared by the Company’s financial advisor, Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC (“Morgan Stanley”), in connection with the rendering of its fairness opinion; (ii) Qlik management’s projections, utilized by Morgan Stanley in its financial analyses; and (iii) material information concerning the sale process leading up to the Proposed Transaction. The failure to adequately disclose such material information constitutes a violation of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act as stockholders need such information in order to cast a fully informed vote in connection with the Proposed Transaction.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: QLIK
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: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 16-CV-03800
JUDGE: Hon. GERALD J. PAPPERT
DATE FILED: 07/13/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/02/2016
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/13/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Brodsky & Smith, LLC
    Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Brodsky & Smith, LLC, PA 19004
    610.667.6200 610.667.6200 ·
  2. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
  3. WeissLaw LLP
    551 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600, WeissLaw LLP, NY 10176
    212.682.3025 212.682-3010 · info@wllawny.com
No Document Title Filing Date