Legal Action News

Your news source for lawsuits and other civil legal matters

Legal Action Recently...

April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004


Legal Action News RSS Feed
RSS Feed



 

Class Action Filed Against Conexant Systems, Inc.

19 January 2005

Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC files class action against Conexant Systems, Inc. expanding class period to include individuals and institutions that purchased Conexant
Securities between November 3, 2003 and November 4, 2004 -- CNXT.

Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC (http://www.classactioncounsel.com; e-mail: jmiller@classactioncounsel.com), a law firm with offices in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Florida, announces that it has filed a lawsuit seeking class action status in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of all
persons (the "Class") who purchased the securities of Conexant Systems, Inc.
(Nasdaq: CNXT)("Conexant" or the "Company") during the period November 3, 2003
through November 4, 2004 (the "Class Period"). The Complaint, which names
Conexant Systems, Inc., Dwight W. Decker and Armando Geday as Defendants, may
be obtained from the Court, or you can call our offices toll free at either
866/540-5505 or 877/891-9880 to speak with an attorney regarding this matter
and we will send you a copy of the Complaint.

The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, Defendants violated
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that, during the
Class Period, the Company issued a series of false and misleading statements
regarding its merger with GlobespanVirata, stating that the merged Company
would deliver stronger financial performance and create more value for its
shareholders, customers and employees than either Conexant or GlobespanVirata
could if they continued operating independently. In addition, the Complaint
alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants issued a series of false
and misleading statements regarding its wireless local area network ("WLAN")
business, which was acquired by GlobespanVirata from Intersil in August, 2003,
the manner in which that business unit had been integrated into the Company
and its ability to contribute to Company earnings. The Complaint alleges
that, in actuality, the merger of Conexant and GlobespanVirata was not
successful and, throughout the Class Period, the Company was facing severe
integration problems with respect to the combined companies' parallel DSL and
wireless technology offerings, as well as their sales and administrative
functions. The Complaint also alleges that the Company failed to properly
integrate the WLAN business unit and made material misrepresentations
regarding this business unit because, during the Class Period, Defendants had
effectively ceased working upon the integration of the WLAN business unit --
which was a critical component of the rationale for the merger.

On November 4, 2004, Conexant released its financial and operational
results for the fourth quarter ended October 1, 2004, reporting that its
"fourth fiscal quarter 2004 revenues of $213.1 million decreased 20 percent
from the third fiscal quarter revenues of $267.6 million," and stating that
"'Conexant's sequential decline in revenues to $213.1 million in the fourth
fiscal quarter was largely due to excess channel inventory that resulted from
lower-than-expected customer demand....'" On this news, Conexant stock fell
10% on November 5, 2004. This marked fall in stock price followed a decline
in Conexant's stock price of over 43% on July 6, 2004, when the Company
announced similarly disappointing performance in the third quarter of 2004.

If you are purchased Conexant securities between November 3, 2003 and
November 4, 2004 (inclusive), you may qualify to serve as lead plaintiff on
behalf of the Class. All motions for appointment as lead plaintiff must be
filed with the Court no later than February 15, 2005. Any member of the
proposed Class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff in this action
through counsel of his or her choice, or may remain an absent class member.
There are certain legal requirements to serve as lead plaintiff, which we
would be pleased to discuss with you. Please contact James E. Miller, Esquire
(866/540-5505; jmiller@classactioncounsel.com), or James C. Shah, Esquire
(877/891-9880; jshah@classactioncounsel.com), if you would like to discuss
this action or have any question regarding this notice or your rights.


Source: PR Newswire


All trademarks and copyrighted information contained herein are the property of their respective owners.

 
Law News



A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   X   Y   Z