Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 11/03/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: May 18, 2017

According to the Complaint, on April 28, 2017, the Company announced that it had entered into an agreement and plan of merger (the “Merger Agreement”), by which Marlin would commence a tender offer (the “Tender Offer”) to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Tangoe’s common stock at a purchase price of $6.50 per share in cash (the “Proposed Transaction”). At closing, Marlin intends to combine Tangoe with its existing portfolio company Asentinel. The Tender Offer is set to expire on June 13, 2017.

In connection with the commencement of the Tender Offer, on May 12, 2017, the Company filed a Recommendation Statement on Schedule 14D-9 (the “Recommendation Statement”) with the SEC. The Complaint alleges the Recommendation Statement is materially deficient and misleading because, inter alia, it fails to disclose material information about the financial projections prepared by the Company and relied upon by the Company’s financial advisor, and the potential conflicts of interest faced by Company executives.

On October 4, 2017, the Court directed to consolidate the related case, Levine v. Tangoe, Inc. et al, 3:17-cv-00873 (AWT), into this case. The Court also granted the Motion to appoint Lead Plaintiffs and Counsel. Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on November 3.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: TNGO
Company Market: OTC-BB
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. Connecticut
DOCKET #: 17-CV-00832
JUDGE: Hon. Victor A. Bolden
DATE FILED: 05/18/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/28/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/18/2017
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford)
    733 Summer Street, Suite 304, Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford), CT 06901
    203-992-4523 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Connecticut
DOCKET #: 17-CV-00832
JUDGE: Hon. Victor A. Bolden
DATE FILED: 11/03/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/28/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/18/2017
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford)
    733 Summer Street, Suite 304, Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford), CT 06901
    203-992-4523 ·
  2. Monteverde & Associates PC
    350 Fifth Avenue, 59th Floor, Monteverde & Associates PC, NY 10118
    (212) 971-1341 ·
No Document Title Filing Date