Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 03/05/2017 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: March 01, 2017

According to the Complaint, on February 14, 2015, Cynosure, Hologic and Merger Sub entered into a definitive Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, Hologic commenced the Tender Offer on February 22, 2017. The Tender Offer is scheduled to expire at 12:00 midnight EST on March 21, 2017. Following the completion of the Tender Offer, and subject to the terms and conditions of the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub will be merged with and into Cynosure, with Cynosure surviving as a wholly owned subsidiary of Hologic (the “Merger”).

The Complaint alleges in order to accomplish the Tender Offer, Defendants have filed a Schedule 14D-9 Solicitation/Recommendation Statement (“Recommendation Statement”) that fails to provide all material information. In particular, the Recommendation Statement does not include a fair summary of the financial analyses performed by Leerink Partners LLC (“Leerink”), financial advisor for Cynosure, and fails to disclose the projections for Cynosure (including a GAAP to Non-GAAP reconciliation mandated by the SEC).

This case was voluntarily dismissed on March 5, 2017.


Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Medical Equipment & Supplies
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: CYNO
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 #: 17-CV-00212
JUDGE: Hon. Sue L. Robinson
DATE FILED: 03/01/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/01/2017
  1. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York)
  2. Monteverde & Associates PC
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available