Case Page


Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 09/09/2016 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: September 09, 2016

According to the law firm press release, FEI designs, manufactures and supports a broad range of high-performance microscopy workflow solutions that provide images and answers at the micro-, nano- and picometer scales.

On May 27, 2016, FEI and Thermo Fisher announced that they had entered into a definitive merger agreement under which FEI would be acquired by Thermo Fisher (the "Acquisition"). Following a vote of FEI shareholders approving the Acquisition, FEI stockholders received $107.50 in cash for each share of FEI common stock held.

The complaint alleges defendants breached their fiduciary duties and/or aided and abetted such breaches and violated state and federal law in connection with the Acquisition. Specifically, the complaint alleges that in an attempt to secure shareholder support for the Acquisition, on June 24, 2016, defendants issued a materially false and misleading Preliminary Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A (the "Proxy"). The Proxy, which recommended that FEI shareholders vote in favor of the Acquisition, omits and/or misrepresents material information about the unfair sales process for the Company, the unfair consideration offered in the Acquisition, and the actual intrinsic value of the Company on a standalone basis and as a merger partner for Thermo Fisher in contravention of §§14(a) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act and/or defendants' fiduciary duty of disclosure under state law.


Sector: Technology
Industry: Scientific & Technical Instr.
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: FEIC
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. Oregon
DOCKET #: 16-CV-01792
JUDGE: Hon. Michael H. Simon
DATE FILED: 09/09/2016
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/09/2016
  1. Cypen & Cypen
    777 Arthur Godfrey Road, Suite 320, Cypen & Cypen, FL 33140
    305/532-3200 305/535-0050 ·
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
  3. Stoll, Stoll, Berne, Lokting & Schlachter
    209 South West Oak Street, Stoll, Stoll, Berne, Lokting & Schlachter, OR 97204
    503.227.1600 503.227.6840 ·
No Document Title Filing Date