|
|
 | | | |
- close
- close
- close
- close
| |||||||||
This excerpt taken from the MRVL 10-Q filed Sep 6, 2007. Securities
Litigation. Between
October 5, 2006 and November 13, 2006, four putative class actions were filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
against us and certain of our officers and directors. The complaints allege that we and certain of
our officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by making false
and misleading statements and omissions relating to the grants of stock
options. The complaints seek, on behalf
of persons who purchased our common stock during the period from October 3,
2001 to October 3, 2006, unspecified damages, interest, and costs and expenses,
including attorneys’ fees and disbursements.
Pursuant to an order of the court dated February 2, 2007, these four
putative class actions were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Securities Litigation. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on
August 16, 2007. Pursuant to stipulation
and by order of the court, defendants have 45 days to respond to the complaint.
This excerpt taken from the MRVL 10-Q filed Jul 9, 2007. Securities
Litigation. Between
October 5, 2006 and November 13, 2006, four putative class actions were filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
against us and certain of our officers and directors. The complaints allege that we and certain of
our officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by making false
and misleading statements and omissions relating to the grants of stock
options. The complaints seek, on behalf
of persons who purchased our common stock during the period from October 3,
2001 to October 3, 2006, unspecified damages, interest, and costs and expenses,
including attorneys’ fees and disbursements.
Pursuant to an order of the court dated February 2, 2007, these four
putative class actions were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Securities Litigation. By an order of the court dated February 28,
2007, the plaintiffs must file a consolidated complaint no later than 45 days
after we file restated financial statements with the SEC.
This excerpt taken from the MRVL 10-K filed Jul 2, 2007. Securities Litigation. Between
October 5, 2006 and November 13, 2006, four putative class actions
were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California against the Company and certain of its officers and directors. The
complaints allege that the Company and certain of its officers and directors
violated the federal securities laws by making false and misleading statements
and omissions relating to the grants of stock options. The complaints seek, on
behalf of persons who purchased our common stock during the period from October 3,
2001 to October 3, 2006, unspecified damages, interest, and costs and
expenses, including attorneys’ fees and disbursements. Pursuant to an order of
the court dated February 2, 2007, these four putative class actions were
consolidated as a single action entitled In re Marvell Technology
Group Ltd. Securities Litigation. By an order of the court dated February 28,
2007, the plaintiffs must file a consolidated complaint no later than 45 days
after the Company files restated financial statements with the SEC.
This excerpt taken from the MRVL 10-Q filed Jul 2, 2007. Securities
Litigation. Between
October 5, 2006 and November 13, 2006, four putative class actions were filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
against us and certain of our officers and directors. The complaints allege that we and certain of
our officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by making false
and misleading statements and omissions relating to the grants of stock
options. The complaints seek, on behalf
of persons who purchased our common stock during the period from October 3,
2001 to October 3, 2006, unspecified damages, interest, and costs and expenses,
including attorneys’ fees and disbursements.
Pursuant to an order of the court dated February 2, 2007, these four
putative class actions were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Securities Litigation. By an order of the court dated February 28,
2007, the plaintiffs must file a consolidated complaint no later than 45 days
after we file restated financial statements with the SEC.
This excerpt taken from the MRVL 10-Q filed Jul 2, 2007. Securities
Litigation. Between
October 5, 2006 and November 13, 2006, four putative class actions were filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
against us and certain of our officers and directors. The complaints allege that we and certain of
our officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by making false
and misleading statements and omissions relating to the grants of stock
options. The complaints seek, on behalf
of persons who purchased our common stock during the period from October 3,
2001 to October 3, 2006, unspecified damages, interest, and costs and expenses,
including attorneys’ fees and disbursements.
Pursuant to an order of the court dated February 2, 2007, these four
putative class actions were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Securities Litigation. By an order of the court dated February 28,
2007, the plaintiffs must file a consolidated complaint no later than 45 days
after we file restated financial statements with the SEC.
This excerpt taken from the MRVL 10-Q filed Jul 2, 2007. Securities
Litigation. Between
October 5, 2006 and November 13, 2006, four putative class actions were filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
against us and certain of our officers and directors. The complaints allege that we and certain of
our officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by making false
and misleading statements and omissions relating to the grants of stock
options. The complaints seek, on behalf
of persons who purchased our common stock during the period from October 3,
2001 to October 3, 2006, unspecified damages, interest, and costs and expenses,
including attorneys’ fees and disbursements.
Pursuant to an order of the court dated February 2, 2007, these four
putative class actions were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Securities Litigation. By an order of the court dated February 28,
2007, the plaintiffs must file a consolidated complaint no later than 45 days
after we file restated financial statements with the SEC.
| EXCERPTS ON THIS PAGE:
RELATED TOPICS for MRVL: |
| |||||||
