|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 4236 | Stocks | 03/17/2005
A class action has been filed against Sierra Wireless, Inc.(NasdaqNM:SWIR), certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between January 28, 2004 and January 26, 2005. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock.
Sierra Wireless, Inc. develops and markets a range of products, including wireless data modems for portable computers, embedded modules for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), rugged vehicle-mounted modems and mobile phones. According to a press release dated February 3, 2005, a securities class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased securities of Sierra Wireless, Inc. The Complaint alleges that Sierra and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period concerning the Company's prospects and financial performance, thereby artificially inflating the price of Sierra Wireless securities. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose the following materially adverse facts: (i) that Sierra's strategy to correct its deficiency in technology by introducing the Voq Smartphone was flawed and its business model was not working; (ii) that Sierra was facing increasing competition, intensified by its failure to enter into the WCDMA (wideband code-division multiple access) market; (iii) that Sierra's recent venture into the Smartphone market with the introduction of its new Voq line was a serious misstep, as it did little to add revenue and further seriously harmed Sierra's relationship with a prime customer palmOne as its Voq Smartphone would compete with palmOne's Treo -- the product for which Sierra was a supplier; (iv) that Sierra's dependence on revenue from palmOne in its original equipment manufacturer ("OEM") business was substantially greater than had been reported; and (v) that Sierra's customers were materially over- inventoried, which would lead to greatly diminished orders and sales in future quarters. Further, on or around January 26, 2005, Sierra issued a press release announcing that its revenue for the fourth quarter of 2004 was well below the previous guidance and that it expected a steep decline in its revenue going forward. As a result, on the next trading day, January 27, 2005, Sierra's stock plummeted 38% to $8.97 per share. Several class action lawsuits have also been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. If you bought Sierra Wireless, Inc. securities between January 28, 2004 and January 26, 2005, inclusive, and would like to obtain information about the lawsuit, then you are invited to call (866) 467-1400 to speak with an attorney. At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Stocks Cases of Interest The parties have reached a tentative $15.25 million settlement in a class action filed against sportswear company Ashworth, Inc., (Nasdaq:ASHW) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between September 4, 1997, and July 15, 1998. A claims deadline had apparently not yet been set as of July 9, 2004. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement should contact the attorneys for the class for more information. A class action has been filed against Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. (NYSE: WPI) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between November 2, 1999, and November 13, 2001. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. A class action lawsuit has been filed against Prestige Brand Holdings, Inc. (PBH), certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between February 09, 2005 and July 28, 2005. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock. A lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of Visteon Corp. ("Visteon" or the "Company") (NYS: VC.N) between January 23, 2004 and January 31, 2005, inclusive, (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed against Visteon, Peter Pestillo, Michael Johnston, Glenda J. Minor, Daniel R. Coulson and James Palmer ("Defendants"). A class action has been filed against Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (ANF), certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between June 2, 2005 and August 16, 2005. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock. A class action has been filed against Baxter International, Inc., a global health care products maker, (NYSE: BAX) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company’s common stock between April 19, 2001 and July 21, 2004. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company’s securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock. |
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
