Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 09/25/2018 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: January 16, 2018

According to the law firm press release, Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. manufactures semiconductor products, which includes microprocessors, embedded microprocessors, chipsets, graphics, video and multimedia products. The Company offers its products worldwide.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) a fundamental security flaw in AMD’s processor chips renders them susceptible to hacking; and (ii) as a result, AMD’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On January 3, 2018, media outlets reported that Google Project Zero’s security team had discovered serious security flaws affecting computer processors built by Intel Corporation, AMD and other chipmakers. In a blog post, the Project Zero team stated that one of these security flaws—dubbed the “Spectre” vulnerability—allows third parties to gather passwords and other sensitive data from a system’s memory. In response to the Project Zero team’s announcement, a spokesperson for AMD advised investors that while its own chips were vulnerable to one variant of Spectre, there was “near zero risk” that AMD chips were vulnerable to the second Spectre variant.

Then, on January 11, 2018, post-market, AMD issued a press release entitled “An Update on AMD Processor Security,” acknowledging that its chips were, in fact, susceptible to both variants of the Spectre security flaw.

On this news, AMD’s share price fell $0.12 or 0.99%, to close at $12.02 on January 12, 2018.

On June 11, 2018, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on August 3.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Semiconductors
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: AMD
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 18-CV-00321
JUDGE: Hon. Edward J. Davila
DATE FILED: 01/16/2018
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/21/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/11/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC (New York)
    60 East 42nd Street - Suite 4600, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC (New York), NY 10165
    212.697.6484 212.697.7296 · info@bgandg.com
  2. Pomerantz LLP (Beverly Hills)
    468 North Cameden Drive, Pomerantz LLP (Beverly Hills)
    (818) 532-6499 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 18-CV-00321
JUDGE: Hon. Edward J. Davila
DATE FILED: 08/03/2018
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/29/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/11/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New Los Angeles)
    355 South Grand Ave, Suite 2450, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New Los Angeles), CA 90071
    (213) 785-2610 (213) 226-4684 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available