Search for: "Tellabs, Inc." Results 121 - 140 of 151
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Apr 2013, 4:00 am by Matthew Tolve
On the basis of these new allegations, the district court denied a motion to dismiss the SAC, finding them sufficient to allege scienter under the standard set forth in Tellabs, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Oct 2007, 1:30 am
Spinogatti, a senior counsel at the firm, write that the Supreme Court made clear in Tellabs a plaintiff's obligation to plead facts that give rise to a strong inference that the defendant acted with scienter. [read post]
5 Jan 2007, 2:05 pm
The case is Tellabs Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 8:00 am by J Robert Brown Jr.
  In the reply brief, Petitioners asserted that: In this case, the handful of adverse event reports (“AERs”) Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. [read post]
30 May 2007, 4:57 pm
The SEC also filed a Supreme Court brief opposing investors in a case against Tellabs Inc., accused of overstating its business prospects, and apparently plans to oppose shareholders in a Supreme Court case against Motorola and Cisco Systems, which are accused of helping a communications company add $17 million in phony revenue to its books. [read post]
17 Feb 2012, 3:13 pm by Eric Schweibenz
(“Cypress”) filed a complaint naming as respondents GSI Technology, Inc.; Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericcson; Ericcson Inc.; Motorola Mobility, Inc.; Motorola Solutions, Inc.; Tellabs, Inc.; Cisco Systems, Inc.; Avnet, Inc.; and Hewlett-Packard Company/Tipping Point (collectively, the “Respondents”). [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 10:55 pm
Because this formulation of the applicable pleading standard is contrary to the Supreme Court's decision in Tellabs, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Aug 2009, 8:34 pm
Thanks to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Tellabs Inc. v. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 4:23 am by Kevin LaCroix
One of the more significant recent developments in the corporate and securities litigation arena has been the emergence of the debate over fee-shifting bylaws following the Delaware Supreme Court’s May 2014 decision in ATP Tour, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jul 2009, 5:29 am
  That motive, according to the Second Circuit, was far from cogent or compelling, as required under Tellabs, Inc. v. [read post]