LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

CYLINK CLASS ACTION LITIGATION Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: CCAL157454, CourtName: CLASS ACTION CASES, State: CA California, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>CCAL157454, Cylink, Cybermedia, Cylink Corporation, Securities, Class Action, Sarrat, Amended Complaint, Facts, Scienter, Lead Plaintiffs, Allegations, Vrw, First Aid, Class Members, Common Stock, Class Period, Revenue, Motion, Allege, Revenue Recognition, Class Member, Block Group, Compuserve, Misleading, Daws, Complaint, Fernand, Sales, California, Materials, United States, Stock, Fee, York, Pslra, Firm, Class Member Movants, Supp, Bid, Proposed Lead Plaintiffs, Rees, Exchange Act, A/r Turnover Ratios , ContentID: 120249622

Case Documents
1   PARTY AND COUNSEL LIST
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122419
3 pages
TXT
2   ORDER REJECTING BID
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122417
13 pages
TXT
3   ORDER RE LEAD COUNSEL APPOINTMENT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122416
15 pages
TXT
4   ORDER RE CONFERENCE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122415
7 pages
TXT
5   ORDER PROVISIONALLY CERTIFYING CLASS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122414
31 pages
TXT
6   ORDER ASSIGNING LEAD COUNSEL
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122412
10 pages
PDF
7   DECLARATION OF STEVE S
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122406
6 pages
TXT
8   COMPLAINT B
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122402
27 pages
HTML
9   COMPLAINT B 3
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122400
18 pages
TXT
10   COMPLAINT B 2
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122399
55 pages
HTML
11   COMPLAINT A
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122398
28 pages
HTML
12   CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122397
2 pages
TXT
13 2001-04-12 REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122422
18 pages
PDF
14 2001-04-12 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122396
4 pages
PDF
15 2001-03-29 PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING MOTION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122420
2 pages
TXT
16 2001-03-29 NOTICE OF MOTION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122411
18 pages
TXT
17 2001-03-29 DECLARATION OF MAURA L
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122404
2 pages
TXT
18 2001-01 DECLARATION OF MAURA L
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122405
3 pages
PDF
19 2000-11-06 ORDER
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122418
19 pages
PDF
20 2000-09-06 DOCKET
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122407
3 pages
HTML
21 1999-11-05 ORDER DENYING REQUESTS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122413
7 pages
TXT
22 1999-02-12 REPLY MEMO IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO APPOINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122421
12 pages
TXT
23 1999-02-12 MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122410
11 pages
TXT
24 1999-02-12 MOTION TO APPOINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122409
18 pages
TXT
25 1999-02-12 DECLARATION OF JAMES J
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122403
5 pages
TXT
26 1999-01-22 MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTIONS TO CONSOLIDATE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122408
12 pages
TXT
27 1998-11-25 COMPLAINT B 4
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 122401
19 pages
TXT
Total Documents: 27 documents , 368 pages
Price: $ 149.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . PARTY AND COUNSEL LIST

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
CALIFORNIA
NORTHERN DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT
CYLINK CORPORATION
WENDERHOLD
3:98cv4292 Wenderhold v. Cylink Corporation, et al

                                                            RELATE
                       U.S. District Court
  U.S. District for the Northern District of California (S.F.)


NANCY WENDERHOLD                  Jules Brody
     Plaintiff                    (COR NTC)
                                  Stull Stull & Brody
                                  6 East 45th St 4th Flr
                                  New York, NY 10017
                                  (212) 687-7230

                                  Jacob A. Goldberg
                                  (COR NTC)
                                  Berger & Montague, P.C.
                                  1622 Locust St
                                  Philadelphia, PA 19103
                                  (215) 875-3000

                                  James E. Tullman
                                  (COR NTC)
                                  Elizabeth P. Lin
                                  (COR LD NTC)
                                  Weiss & Yourman
                                  10940 Wilshire Blvd
                                  24th Flr
                                  Los Angeles, CA 90024
                                  (310) 208-2800

                                  Michael D. Braun
                                  (COR NTC)
                                  Stull Stull & Brody
                                  10940 Wilshire Blvd.
                                  Ste 2300
                                  Los Angeles, CA 90024
                                  (310) 209-2468

                                  Joseph H. Weiss
                                  (COR NTC)
                                  Weiss & Yourman
                                  551 5th Ave
                                  Ste 1600
                                  New York, NY 10176
                                  212-682-3025

                                  Stephen J. Fearon, Jr.
SNIPPETS:
  • 3:98cv4292 Wenderhold v. Cylink Corporation,
  • U.S. District Court
  • U.S. District for the Northern District of California

  • 2 . ORDER REJECTING BID

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    RECOVERY
    FIRM
    PROPOSALS
    COURT
    ATTORNEY
    LITIGATION
    BID
    CLASS COUNSEL
    FRD
    ATTORNEY EFFORT
    AMOUNT
    ABBEY
    DEFENDANT
    PLAINTIFF
    EXPENSES
    ORACLE
    CLASS ACTION
    SECURITIES
    LAWYERS
    VRW
    COSTS
    COMPETING
    DESIGNATION
    BIDDING
    FEE SCHEDULE
    EVALUATING
    DISTRICT
    REPRESENTATION
    INCENTIVES
    
                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
    NANCY WENDERHOLD                   )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4292 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION, et al.,        )
                                       )
                        Defendants.    )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    HAROLD LERNER,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4296 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    CHAD B. POLING,                    )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4360 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    MAX SILBERMAN,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4536 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • Plaintiff,) No. C 98-4292 VRW
  • Defendant.
  • designation as class counsel.
  • In any event, the law firm of Abbey, Gardner &
  • to assure that the amount and mode of payment of attorneys' fees
  • the court finds the Abbey bid unacceptable.
  • In evaluating Abbey's bid for designation as class
  • See Sherleigh Associates v Windmere-Durable Holdings, 184 FRD 688;
  • Amino Acid Lysine Antitrust Litigation, 918 F Supp 1190 (ND Ill
  • (fee shifting statute applicable).
  • bidding approach employed here over ex post lodestar and benchmark
  • See In re Oracle Securities
  • two features of class counsel fees that would emerge from a process most closely approximates
  • The ratio of fees and expenses to recovery
  • should increase as the amount of attorney
  • "class action plaintiffs' lawyers obtain a smaller fraction of the
  • Contingent Fees in Class Action Litigation," 19 J Legal Stud 247,
  • In evaluating bids, then, the court should scrutinize
  • firm's proposed fee schedule, attached as Exhibit A to this order,
  • additional attorney effort.
  • here there is--as yet--no such competing bid and the Abbey bid is
  • be so considered and diminishes the incentives for the firm to
  • proposal for such representation in the clerk's office on or before
  • Joint proposals will not be considered.

  • 3 . ORDER RE LEAD COUNSEL APPOINTMENT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    FIRM
    FEE
    PROPOSALS
    BID
    INNELLI
    RECOVERY
    LITIGATION
    PLAINTIFF
    EXPENSES
    WEISS
    MOLDER
    YOURMAN
    COUNSEL
    SECURITIES
    DEFENDANT
    CYLINK
    VRW
    PRICE
    QUALITATIVE ADVANTAGES
    MOTION
    SCHEDULE
    ABBEY
    FRD
    COMPETING
    CYLINK SHAREHOLDERS
    APPOINTMENT
    CIRCUIT
    DISMISS
    PRIOR
    
                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
    NANCY WENDERHOLD,                  )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4292 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION, et al.,        )
                                       )
                        Defendants.    )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    HAROLD LERNER,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4296 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    CHAD B. POLING,                    )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4360 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    MAX SILBERMAN,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4536 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • Plaintiff,) No. C 98-4292 VRW
  • Defendant.
  • This order addresses the issue of appointment of lead
  • counsel in these consolidated securities class actions.
  • Wenderhold v Cylink Corp., 188 FRD 577.
  • Gardy & Squitieri--submitted a bid.
  • Wenderhold v Cylink Corp., 189 FRD 570, 571.
  • The Abbey proposal, however, failed to comply with the
  • schedule did not include litigation expenses.
  • Expenses, according to the proposal, would be assessed separately
  • against any recovery fund.
  • proposals from three law firms.
  • Weiss & Yourman, a firm that had
  • The third bid came from Innelli & Molder,
  • See In re Network Associates Securities Litigation,
  • disclosed the competing proposals to the bidding firms to provide
  • The court proceeded to hear argument from Weiss &
  • Yourman and Innelli & Molder with respect to their bids and the
  • qualitative advantages of the respective firms.
  • the competing fee proposals expressed in terms of net recovery to
  • Of a settlement fund created prior to the motion to dismiss
  • price is not the sole consideration.
  • litigation experience in this circuit,
  • particular case and has been retained by Cylink shareholders.

  • 4 . ORDER RE CONFERENCE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    VRW
    LITIGATION
    DEFENDANT
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    STAKE
    COURT
    YORK
    COUNSEL
    DISTRICT COURT
    WEISS
    PHILLIPS
    BALKHEIMER
    SILBERMAN
    SECURITIES LITIGATION
    STULL
    CLERK
    LERNER
    USC
    CALIFORNIA
    LERACH
    SAN FRANCISCO
    SQUITIERI
    GARDY
    BRODY
    YOURMAN
    THIRD PERIOD
    POLING
    DAWS
    DIFFER
    
                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
    NANCY WENDERHOLD,                  )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4292 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION, et al.,        )
                                       )
                        Defendants.    )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    HAROLD LERNER                      )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4296 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    CHAD B. POLING,                    )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4360 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    MAX SILBERMAN,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 99-4536 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • Plaintiff,) No. C 98-4292 VRW
  • Defendant.
  • Counsel should be prepared to discuss issues raised by
  • The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act,
  • See 15 USC
  • The various plaintiffs also differ in their financial
  • Silberman has the largest stake in the litigation;
  • Balkheimer and De Phillips appear to have the largest stake in the
  • Lerner, Balkheimer and De Phillips, however, have
  • Sarrat and Daws as defendants.
  • Plaintiff Poling
  • largest stake for the third period as to defendant Morgan.
  • Milestone Scientific Securities Litigation,
  • Nancy Wenderhold v Cylink Corporation,
  • I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
  • That on January 26, 1999, I served a true and correct copyof the attached, by placing said
  • Kevin Yourman James Tullman Elizabeth Lin Behram Parekh
  • WEISS & YOURMAN
  • STULL, STULL & BRODY
  • East 45th Street New York,
  • ABBEY, GARDY & SQUITIERI
  • San Francisco, CA 94105
  • MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD HYNES & LERACH

  • 5 . ORDER PROVISIONALLY CERTIFYING CLASS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    COURT
    CLASS MEMBERS
    DEFENDANTS
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    CLASS ACTION
    SECURITIES
    COMPLAINT
    STOCK
    ALLEGES
    VRW
    LEAD PLAINTIFF
    PURPORTED CLASS
    EXCHANGE ACT
    USC
    LITIGATION
    AGGREGATION
    CYLINK COMMON STOCK
    PSLRA
    REPRESENTATION
    LAW FIRMS
    INVESTORS
    PURCHASERS
    DIRECTORS
    APPOINTMENT
    PROPOSED LEAD
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT
    PRESUMPTION
    OMISSIONS
    MISSTATEMENTS
    
                       UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
    NANCY WENDERHOLD,                  )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4292 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION, et al.,        )
                                       )
                        Defendants.    )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    HAROLD LERNER,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4296 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
    
    
    
                                     1
      __________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    CHAD B. POLING,                    )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C-98-4360 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    MAX SILBERMAN,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )    No. C 98-4536 VRW
                                       )
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • Plaintiff,) No. C 98-4292 VRW
  • violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b5, 15 USC § 78j, 17 CFR §
  • with two purported class members who have not filed complaints seek
  • provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
  • seek to appoint a consortium of law firms to serve as co-lead
  • appointment of class counsel and consolidation.
  • notice was adequate under the PSLRA notice provisions.
  • Few securities class action complaints are so limited.
  • the pleadings allege multiple misstatements or omissions
  • The defendants at bar contend that the notices here are
  • only to the selection of the most adequate lead plaintiff.
  • If the purpose of these notices was to augment the number of class members represented by
  • Plaintiff alleges, inter alia, that documents disseminated during the Class Period relating
  • Certain officers of the Company, including at least one of the defendants, took advantage of
  • If you purchased Cylink Corporation stock between April 23, 1998 and November 4, 1998, you
  • You should be aware that class action complaints involving the securities of the above
  • The Complaint charges that, throughout the Class Period, the Company and certain of its
  • The case was filed on behalf of all persons who purchased Cylink common stock between April
  • The statute imposes a rebuttable presumption
  • right to challenge a proposed lead plaintiff.
  • The rebuttable presumption created by the PSLRA which favors the plaintiff with the largest

  • 6 . ORDER ASSIGNING LEAD COUNSEL

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    FEE
    COURT
    PROPOSALS
    BID
    INNELLI
    LITIGATION
    RECOVERY
    EXPENSES
    MOLDER
    SECURITIES
    WEISS
    QUALITATIVE ADVANTAGES
    YOURMAN
    CYLINK
    PRICE
    COUNSEL
    COST
    AMOUNT
    REPRESENTATION
    CYLINK SHAREHOLDER
    ATTORNEYS
    DEFENDANT
    PLAINTIFF
    SCHEDULE
    ANGELES
    APPOINTMENT
    COMPETING
    INTERPRETATIONS
    PHILADELPHIA
    
    1
    
    2
    
    3
    
    4
    
    5
    
    6
    
    7
    
    8                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
    9                          NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    10
    
    11    NANCY WENDERHOLD,
    
    12                           Plaintiff,          No. C 98-4292 V R W
    13
    
    14              v.
    
    15
          CYLINK CORPORATION, et al.,
    16
    
    17                           Defendants.
    
    18
          HAROLD LERNER,
    19
    20                           Plaintiff,          No. C 98-4296 VRW
    
    21
                    v.
    22
    
    23    CYLINK CORPORATION,
    
    24
                                 Defendant.
    25
    
    26
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • CYLINK CORPORATION, et al.,
  • Defendant.
  • Expenses, according to the proposal, would be assessed separately
  • against any recovery fund.
  • the court rejected the Abbey bid
  • Weiss & Yourman, a firm that had
  • The third bid came from Innelli & Molder, a Philadelphia
  • 15 litigation and did not represent a Cylink shareholder,
  • The court borrowed this helpful concept from Judge
  • See In re Network Associates Securities Litigation,
  • 23 disclosed the competing proposals to the bidding firms to provide
  • The court proceeded to hear argument from Weiss &
  • Yourman and Innelli & Molder with respect to their bids and the
  • qualitative advantages of the respective firms.
  • to assure that the amount and mode of payment of attorneys' fees
  • 11 Angeles and New York.
  • 13 the competing fee proposals expressed in terms of net recovery to
  • 17 useful supplement to the percentage-of-recovery schedule the court
  • 15 initial bid schedule to multiple interpretations,
  • price is not the sole consideration.
  • 12 consisting of ten attorneys in Los Angeles;
  • 13 working relationship with defense counsel and an in-house
  • 24 plaintiff is an individual shareholder, prior representation is not
  • qualified to represent the class, and the question of appointment
  • The only cost not included is the cost of administration of claims submitted in accordance

  • 7 . DECLARATION OF STEVE S

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PLAINTIFF
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    DEFENDANTS
    EXHIBIT
    HOWARD
    DAWS
    JOHN
    SARRAT
    FERNAND
    MORGAN
    BUSINESS WIRE
    CONSOLIDATION
    VRW
    NIKKHOU
    STEVE
    STATE BAR
    LEAD COUNSEL
    WENDERHOLD
    CALIFORNIA
    BUTLER
    THOMAS
    FOUGNER
    ROBERT
    ROSATI
    WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH
    CONSOLIDATION ORDER
    PRACTICE
    APPOINT LEAD PLAINTIFFS
    MOTIONS
    
       BORIS FELDMAN (State Bar No. 128838)
       LEO P. CUNNINGHAM (State Bar No. 121605)
       PERI ERLANGER (State Bar No. 196781)
       STEVE S. NIKKHOU (State Bar No. 198915)
       WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
       Professional Corporation
       650 Page Mill Road
       Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
       (650) 493-9300
    
       Attorneys for Defendants
       CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B.
       SARRAT, JOHN H. DAWS, ROBERT B.
       FOUGNER, DR. HOWARD MORGAN, and
       THOMAS L. BUTLER
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                          NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
       NANCY WENDERHOLD, on behalf of herself
       and all others similarly situated,
                             Plaintiff,
       v.
       CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B.
       SARRAT, JOHN H. DAWS and HOWARD
       MORGAN,
                             Defendants.
       ________________________________________ )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       ) Case No.: 98-CV-04292 (VRW)
    
       DECLARATION OF STEVE S.
       NIKKHOU IN SUPPORT OF
       DEFENDANTS' MEMORANDUM IN
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • BORIS FELDMAN (State Bar No. 128838) LEO P. CUNNINGHAM PERI ERLANGER STEVE S. NIKKHOU
  • WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
  • Attorneys for Defendants
  • THOMAS L. BUTLER
  • NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • Plaintiff, v. CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B. SARRAT, JOHN H. DAWS and HOWARD
  • MORGAN,
  • Case No.: 98-CV-04292 (VRW)
  • DECLARATION OF STEVE S. NIKKHOU IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO
  • Plaintiff, v. CYLINK CORPORATION, JOHN H. DAWS
  • Attached as Exhibit 2 to this Declaration is a true and correct copy of the defendants'
  • Attached as Exhibit 3 to this Declaration is a true and correct copy of a notice, dated
  • Attached as Exhibit 67 to this Declaration is a true and correct copy of the Report to the

  • 8 . COMPLAINT B

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SECURITIES
    CLASS ACTION
    FACTS
    BLOCK GROUP
    COMPUSERVE
    MATERIALS
    DEFENDANTS
    IPO
    SUBSCRIBERS
    SHARES
    ALLEGATIONS
    COUNSEL
    MEMBERS
    REGISTRATION STATEMENT
    PROSPECTUS
    SECURITIES ACT
    ONLINE SERVICES
    COMMON STOCK
    CONNECTION
    MISREPRESENTATIONS
    LARRY ROMINE
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    CIS
    EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    STATES DISTRICT COURT
    UNITED STATES
    MISLEADING
    CONSUMER ONLINE
    FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS
    
                         UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
    
    ------------------------------------x
    LARRY ROMINE, on behalf of himself :
    and all others similarly situated, :
                                       :  CASE NO. C2-96-717
              Plaintiff,               :
                                       :  CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR
         v.                            :  VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL
                                       :  SECURITIES LAWS
                                       :
    COMPUSERVE CORPORATION; H&R        :
    BLOCK, INC.; H&R BLOCK GROUP, INC.;:  JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
    RICHARD H. BROWN; ROBERT J; MASSEY;:
    HERBERT J. KAHN; KENNETH MARINIK;  :
    HENRY F. FRIGON; ROGER W. HALE;    :
    MORTON I. SOSLAND,                 :
                                       :
              Defendants.              :
                                       :
    ------------------------------------x
    
    
         Plaintiff, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and
    
    belief (based, inter alia, upon a review and analysis of documents
    
    filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, press releases,
    
    reports of securities analysts, news reports, and the investigation
    
    conducted by and through plaintiff's counsel), except as to the
    
    allegations specifically pertaining to plaintiff and his counsel,
    
    as follows.  Plaintiff believes that further substantial evidentia-
    
    ry support will exist for the allegations set forth below after a
    
    reasonable opportunity for discovery.
    
                              INTRODUCTION
    
         1.   This is a class action which arises out of material
    
    misrepresentations and omissions of fact made in connection with an
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, press releases,
  • reports of securities analysts, news reports, and the investigation
  • allegations specifically pertaining to plaintiff and his counsel,
  • common stock of CompuServe Corporation ("CompuServe" or the
  • Statements made in connection with the IPO were materially false or misleading in that, among
  • declining enrollment of new subscribers were eroding the Company's
  • Plaintiff and other members of the investing public
  • purchased CompuServe common stock at an artificially inflated price
  • based upon defendants' misrepresentations and omissions.
  • CompuServe shares now trade for substantially less than half of
  • Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the
  • prospectus that were filed with the Securities
  • Each of the individual defendants (the "Individual
  • through its wholly-owned subsidiary H&R Block Group,
  • PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
  • Whether the federal securities laws were violated by
  • The Company's revenues have increased significantly over the last three years, primarily
  • The Company has recently begun a major new marketing and distribution effort to capitalize on
  • New CIS subscribers receive ten free hours of access in their first month.
  • independent industry analysts projected that the subscriber base of online services outside
  • contained untrue statements of material facts,
  • statements contained in the Prospectus and other offering materials
  • CERTIFICATION OF LARRY ROMINE

  • 9 . COMPLAINT B 3

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANTS
    PLAINTIFFS
    REVENUE
    EXCHANGE
    ACT
    CLASS ACTION
    DAWS
    FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
    SARRAT
    STOCK
    SALES
    CLASS PERIOD
    VIOLATION
    MISLEADING
    DEMAND
    LERACH LLP
    STOCK PRICE
    NETWORK SECURITY
    SECURITIES
    ALAN SCHULMAN
    GOLDSTEIN LITE
    ACCOUNTING
    MATERIAL FACTS
    CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    PLAINTIFF LEONARD DEPHILLIPS
    PETER BALKHEIMER
    STATES DISTRICT COURT
    HYNES
    
       GOLDSTEIN LITE & DEPALMA, LLC
       Allyn Z. Lite (AL 6774)
       Joseph J. DePalma (JD 7697)
       Two Gateway Center, 12th Floor
       Newark, NJ 07102-5003
       (973) 623-3000
    
       MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD
         HYNES & LERACH LLP
       STEVEN G. SCHULMAN
       SAMUEL H. RUDMAN
       One Pennsylvania Plaza
       New York, NY 10119-0165
       (212) 594-5300
            - and -
       WILLIAM S. LERACH
       ALAN SCHULMAN
       600 West Broadway, Suite 1800
       San Diego, CA 92101
       (619) 231-1058
    
       WOLF POPPER LLP
       PAUL O. PARADIS
       845 Third Avenue
       New York, NY 10022
       (212) 759-4600
    
       Attorneys for Plaintiffs
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                               DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
    
       PETER BALKHEIMER and LEONARD
       DePHILLIPS, On Behalf of Themselves and All
       Others Similarly Situated,
    
                             Plaintiffs,
    
                  vs.
    
       CYLINK CORPORATION, JOHN H. DAWS, and
       FERNAND B. SARRAT,
    
                             Defendants.
       __________________________________________
    
       )
       )
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • GOLDSTEIN LITE & DEPALMA, LLC
  • MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD HYNES & LERACH LLP STEVEN G. SCHULMAN SAMUEL H. RUDMAN
  • Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • PETER BALKHEIMER and LEONARD
  • CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF THE SECURITEES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND JURY DEMAND
  • Plaintiff, Peter Balkheimer, who resides at 7 West Hillover Road, Hampton Bays, New York, and
  • This is an action on behalf of purchasers of the stock of Cylink Corporation, between March
  • Public investors who invested in Cylink based on the Company's reported financial results,
  • Upon these startling revelations, Cylink's stock price has decreased to $3-11/16 per share, a
  • Plaintiff Leonard DePhillips purchased 2,000 shares of Cylink common stock on April 15, 1998
  • Defendant Cylink maintains its headquarters in Sunnyvale, California and operates a sales
  • Defendant Fernand B. Sarrat was, at all relevant times, President, Chief Executive Officer
  • Defendant John H. Daws was Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the
  • The Individual Defendants, because of their positions with the Company, controlled and/or
  • Each defendant was provided with copies of the Company's reports and press releases alleged
  • Cylink Corporation develops, markets and supports network security products that enable and
  • Thus, defendants knew, or recklessly disregarded, that it would not and could not report the
  • These 1stQ 1998 results and the representations concerning them were false and misleading as
  • The Form 10-Q's, which were each signed by Daws, represented that the unaudited condensed
  • During the Class Period, defendants disseminated or approved the false statements specified
  • MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD HYNES & LERACH LLP WILLIAM S. LERACH ALAN SCHULMAN

  • 10 . COMPLAINT B 2

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANTS
    FIRST AID
    SALES
    WARRIER
    CLASS ACTION
    PLAINTIFF
    MARKET
    REVENUE
    SUPPORT
    COMPLAINTS
    DSO
    DISTRIBUTION CHANNEL
    RECEIVABLES
    FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS
    UNNI
    CLASS PERIOD
    MISLEADING
    INGRAM MICRO
    EPS
    UNINSTALLER
    AUTOMATIC SERVICE
    UNITED STATES
    COMPETITION
    MANAGEMENT
    TECHNICAL SUPPORT
    OBSOLETE INVENTORY
    SELLING BUSINESS SOFTWARE
    REPRESENTATIONS
    TECHNOLOGY
    
    
       Kevin J. Yourman (CSB #147159)
       Vahn Alexander (CSB #167373)
       WEISS & YOURMAN
       10940 Wilshire Boulevard
       24th Floor
       Los Angeles, CA 90024
       (310) 208-2800
    
       Edward P. Dietrich (CSB #176118)
       Michael D. Braun (CSB #167416)
       STULL, STULL & BRODY
       10940 Wilshire Boulevard
       Suite 2300
       Los Angeles, CA 90024
       (310) 209-2468
    
       Attorneys for Plaintiff
    
       Steven J. Toll
       Matthew J. Ide
       Kristopher A. Kinkade
       COHEN, MILSTEIN, HAUSFELD
        & T0LL, P.L.L.C.
       999 Third Avenue
       Suite 3600
       Seattle, WA 98104-4001
       (206) 521-0080
    
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                           CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
       JUDY LUI, On Behalf of Herself and All
       Others Similarly Situated,
    
                             Plaintiff,
    
                  v.
    
       CYBERMEDIA, INC., UNNI S. WARRIER,
       JEFFREY W. BEAUMONT, SRIKANTH
       CHARI, BRAD R. KINGSBURY, PETER T.
       MORRIS, KANWAL REKHI, CHARLES M.
       VALENTINE, ANNE T. LAM and RONALD
       S. POSNER
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Attorneys for Plaintiff
  • This action is being brought as a class action on behalf of all individuals who purchased or
  • As is more fully alleged throughout the Complaint, defendants engaged in a scheme and common
  • CyberMedia provides automatic service and support software for Windows-based PCS, allowing
  • The Company commenced operations in November 1991 and introduced the first Windows 95
  • Its First Aid line had garnished market acceptance from consumers and top honors from
  • Basically we have about 10 different meters with which we run the company, and I monitor
  • First Aid was the pioneer in the niche marketplace for service and support software and did
  • Although bigger and better capitalized companies announced plans to enter the service and
  • By the end of July, CyberMedia had reported another record quarter, released an interim
  • All the hype created by CyberMedia's representations paid off and its stock price began to
  • What CyberMedia and the other defendants knew at the time, but the market did not, was that: in a significant increase from the normal rate of return for First Aid products, which would
  • In order to stave off a decline in net sales, CyberMedia continued to ship product into the
  • CyberMedia's DSO, the length of time cash is tied up in receivables, had been increasing at
  • To allay investor concerns, CyberMedia blamed increasing DSO on poor payment terms accorded
  • Moreover, CyberMedia factored its best receivables -- those most likely to sell through -- d 98 in such large volume that net sales would be able to absorb the increase in return reserves
  • While defendants were busy masking poor retail sales by allowing obsolete product to languish
  • So many complaints were being logged on CyberMedia's web site alone, that the Company's
  • Although CyberMedia was inundated with consumer complaints and First Aid 98 was being
  • It is also appropriate to treat the Individual Defendants as a group for pleading purposes
  • "This acquisition enhances our problem-fixing technology, leverages our retail and
  • First Aid Deluxe is the world's best-selling automatic service and support software product

  • 11 . COMPLAINT A

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SECURITIES
    CLASS ACTION
    FACTS
    BLOCK GROUP
    COMPUSERVE
    MATERIALS
    DEFENDANTS
    IPO
    SUBSCRIBERS
    SHARES
    ALLEGATIONS
    COUNSEL
    MEMBERS
    REGISTRATION STATEMENT
    PROSPECTUS
    SECURITIES ACT
    ONLINE SERVICES
    COMMON STOCK
    CONNECTION
    MISREPRESENTATIONS
    LARRY ROMINE
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    CIS
    EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    STATES DISTRICT COURT
    UNITED STATES
    MISLEADING
    CONSUMER ONLINE
    FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS
    
    
                         UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
    
    ------------------------------------x
    LARRY ROMINE, on behalf of himself :
    and all others similarly situated, :
                                       :  CASE NO. C2-96-717
              Plaintiff,               :
                                       :  CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR
         v.                            :  VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL
                                       :  SECURITIES LAWS
                                       :
    COMPUSERVE CORPORATION; H&R        :
    BLOCK, INC.; H&R BLOCK GROUP, INC.;:  JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
    RICHARD H. BROWN; ROBERT J; MASSEY;:
    HERBERT J. KAHN; KENNETH MARINIK;  :
    HENRY F. FRIGON; ROGER W. HALE;    :
    MORTON I. SOSLAND,                 :
                                       :
              Defendants.              :
                                       :
    ------------------------------------x
    
    
         Plaintiff, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and
    
    belief (based, inter alia, upon a review and analysis of documents
    
    filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, press releases,
    
    reports of securities analysts, news reports, and the investigation
    
    conducted by and through plaintiff's counsel), except as to the
    
    allegations specifically pertaining to plaintiff and his counsel,
    
    as follows.  Plaintiff believes that further substantial evidentia-
    
    ry support will exist for the allegations set forth below after a
    
    reasonable opportunity for discovery.
    
                              INTRODUCTION
    
         1.   This is a class action which arises out of material
    
    misrepresentations and omissions of fact made in connection with an
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, press releases,
  • reports of securities analysts, news reports, and the investigation
  • allegations specifically pertaining to plaintiff and his counsel,
  • common stock of CompuServe Corporation ("CompuServe" or the
  • Statements made in connection with the IPO were materially false or misleading in that, among
  • declining enrollment of new subscribers were eroding the Company's
  • Plaintiff and other members of the investing public
  • purchased CompuServe common stock at an artificially inflated price
  • based upon defendants' misrepresentations and omissions.
  • CompuServe shares now trade for substantially less than half of
  • Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the
  • prospectus that were filed with the Securities
  • Each of the individual defendants (the "Individual
  • through its wholly-owned subsidiary H&R Block Group,
  • PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
  • Whether the federal securities laws were violated by
  • The Company's revenues have increased significantly over the last three years, primarily
  • The Company has recently begun a major new marketing and distribution effort to capitalize on
  • New CIS subscribers receive ten free hours of access in their first month.
  • independent industry analysts projected that the subscriber base of online services outside
  • contained untrue statements of material facts,
  • statements contained in the Prospectus and other offering materials
  • CERTIFICATION OF LARRY ROMINE

  • 12 . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MOTION
    CALIFORNIA
    LAW
    FERNAND SARRAT
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
    PALO ALTO
    DECLARE
    ACCORDING
    CROWN
    STANFORD
    DESIGNATED INTERNET
    BERGESON
    STE
    LLP
    MAINES
    ROBERT
    INNELLI
    TRANSMISSION
    DELIVERY
    CONSIGNING
    WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH
    BUSINESS
    ROSEMARIE DEAN
    FOREGOING
    PERJURY
    PENALTY
    ORDINARY COURSE
    INSTRUCTIONS
    
    
                               CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    
       I, Rosemarie Dean, declare:
    
       I am employed in Santa Clara County, State of California. I am over
       the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. My business
       address is Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, 650 Page Mill Road, Palo
       Alto, California 94304-1050.
    
       On this date, I served:
    
       1. Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Amended Consolidated
       Complaint by Cylink Corporation and Fernand Sarrat; Memorandum of
       Points and Authorities;
    
       2. Declaration of Maura L. Rees in Support of Motion to Dismiss
       Amended Consolidated Complaint by Cylink Corporation and Fernand
       Sarrat; and
    
       3. (Proposed) Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Amended Consolidated
       Complaint by Cylink Corporation and Fernand Sarrat Without Leave to
       Amend.
    
       By consigning the document(s) to an express mail service for
       guaranteed next day delivery and by consigning the document (s) to a
       facsimile operator for transmittal on this date to the following
       person(s):
    
    
       John Innelli, Esq. Innelli & Molder
       325 Chestnut Street
       Suite 903
       Philadelphia, PA 19106
       Telephone: (215) 627-3394
       Facsimile: (215) 627-3397
    
       Robert L. Maines, Esq. Janet C. Medlin, Esq.
       Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines & Baruh, LLP
       550 Hamilton Ave., Ste. 220
       Palo Alto, CA 94301
       Telephone: (650) 324-1606
       Facsimile: (650) 324-4613
    
       Daniel J. Bergeson, Esq. Bergeson & Eliopoulos, LLP
       55 Almaden Blvd., Ste. 400
       San Jose, CA 95113
       Telephone: (408) 291-6200
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • I, Rosemarie Dean, declare:
  • My business address is Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, 650 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto,
  • Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Amended Consolidated
  • Complaint by Cylink Corporation and Fernand Sarrat; Memorandum of Points and Authorities;
  • Declaration of Maura L. Rees in Support of Motion to Dismiss Amended Consolidated Complaint
  • By consigning the documentto an express mail service for guaranteed next day delivery and by
  • John Innelli, Esq.
  • Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines & Baruh, LLP
  • Bergeson & Eliopoulos, LLP 55 Almaden Blvd., Ste.
  • By forwarding the documentby electronic transmission on this date, in compliance with Civil
  • The physical address of the Designated Internet Site is:
  • Stanford University School of Law - Robert Crown Law Library Crown Quandrangle Stanford,
  • I am readily familiar with Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's practice for collection and
  • In the ordinary course of business,
  • I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

  • 13 . REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    FACTS
    SCIENTER
    SARRAT
    SUPP
    PLAINTIFFS
    DEFENDANTS
    CIR
    LITIG
    SECURITIES
    REES
    EPSTEIN
    A/R TURNOVER RATIOS
    ALLEGATIONS
    AMEND
    OFFICERS
    STATE BAR
    REVENUE RECOGNITION
    SECURITIES FRAUD
    INFERENCE
    TRANSFER BINDER
    REGULATION S-K
    AUTHORITY
    CCH
    VIOLATION
    AMENDED COMPLAINT FAILS
    PURPORTED SCHEME
    PUBLIC STATEMENT
    OPPOSITION
    
     1  BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
           LEO P. CUNNINGHAM, State Bar No. 121605
     2  MAURA L. REES, State Bar No. 191698
           WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
     3  Professional Corporation
           650 Page Mill Road
     4  Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
           Telephone:  (650) 493-9300
     5  Facsimile:   (650) 565-5100
    
     6  Attorneys for Defendants
           CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
     7
     8                                  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
     9                               NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    10
    11                                                        )  Master File No.
                                                              )  C-98-04292 (VRW)
    12                                                        )
              IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION  )  REPLY MEMORANDUM IN
    13                                                        )  SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
                                                              )  DISMISS AMENDED
    14                                                        )  CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT BY
              This Document Relates To:  ALL ACTIONS          )  CYLINK CORPORATION AND
    15                                                        )  FERNAND SARRAT
                                                              )
    16                                                        )  CLASS ACTION
                                                              )
    17                                                        )  Date:  April 12, 2001
                                                              )         Time:  2:00 p.m.
    18                                                        )         Courtroom: 6, 17th Floor
                                                              )
    19                                                        )         Before:   Hon. Vaughn R. Walker
                                                              )
    20
    21
    
    22
    
    23
    
    24
    
    25
    
    26
    
    27
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
  • Attorneys for Defendants CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
  • Imputation of Scienter to Cylink on the Facts Alleged
  • SHOULD BE WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND
  • Epstein v. Itron, 993 F. Supp.
  • FDIC v. O'Melveny & Meyers, 969 F.2d 744 (9th Cir.
  • Sec. Litig.,, Fed.
  • Sec. L. Rep. (CCH)
  • In re CBT Group PLC Sec. Litig., [1999-2000 Transfer Binder], Fed.
  • the Opposition misstates facts and mischaracterizes the law and allegations in the Amended
  • that include the kind of detailed scienter allegations that the Amended Complaint lacks.
  • Plaintiffs are forced to such measures because they cannot in good faith allege facts that
  • strong inference of scienter as to either Mr. Sarrat or the Company.
  • 12 prevent the officers' scienter from being ascribed to the corporation in this case.
  • 16 Company from the purported scheme by its former officers.
  • The Opposition fails to address the fact that Cylink's
  • a violation of Section 10when they refer to "violation of responsibilities" and departures
  • The negligence that may be established by such a breach foes not establish the scienter
  • Plaintiffs' authority provides no support for the proposition
  • 17 to allege any such benefit and affirmatively allege detriment.4 The Amended Complaint
  • 22 review Cylink's historical A/R Turnover ratios and disclose the trend of those ratios in
  • Sarrat of premature revenue recognition.
  • Regulation S-K does not govern the disclosure requirements of statements
  • 15 was made publicly available after the public statement was issued," Opp.
  • See Rees Reply

  • 14 . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    STATE BAR
    CALIFORNIA
    PALO ALTO
    ACCORDING
    AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
    BUSINESS
    FERNAND SARRAT
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    FOREGOING
    INSTRUCTIONS
    DELIVERY ACCORDING
    CROWN QUANDRANGLE
    DISKETTE
    ELECTRONIC FORM
    FORWARDING
    SUITE
    LLP
    ELIOPOULOS
    BERGESON
    PHILADELPHIA
    MOTION
    MILL ROAD
    ROSATI
    WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH
    PARTY
    AGE
    SANTA CLARA COUNTY
    DECLARE
    ROSEMARIE DEAN
    
     1  BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
           LEO P. CUNNINGHAM, State Bar No. 121605
     2  MAURA L. REES, State Bar No. 191698
           WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
     3  Professional Corporation
           650 Page Mill Road
     4  Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
           Telephone:  (650) 493-9300
     5  Facsimile:   (650) 565-5100
    
     6  Attorneys for Defendants
           CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
     7
     8                                  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
     9                               NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    10
    11                                                                )  Master File No.
                                                                      )  C-98-04292 (VRW)
    12                                                                )
              IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION  )  CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    13                                                                )
                                                                      )  CLASS ACTION
    14                                                                )
              This Document Relates To:  ALL ACTIONS                  )  Date:  April 12, 2001
    15                                                                )  Time:  2:00 p.m.
                                                                      )  Courtroom: 6, 17th Floor
    16                                                                )
                                                                      )  Before:   Hon. Vaughn R. Walker
    17                                                                ) )
    18                                                                ))
    19                                                                ))
    20
    21
    
    22
    23
    24
    25
    26
    27
    
    28
    
                                                     CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
                                                    N.D. Cal. NO. C-98-04292 (VRW)
    
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
  • Attorneys for Defendants CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
  • I, Rosemarie Dean, declare:
  • I am employed in Santa Clara County, State of California.
  • I am over the age of 18 years
  • and not a party to the within action.
  • My business address is Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati,
  • 650 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, California 94304-1050.
  • MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT BY CYLINK
  • Philadelphia, PA 19106
  • Bergeson & Eliopoulos, LLP
  • Suite 400
  • By forwarding the documentin electronic form on this date, by diskette, in
  • Crown Quandrangle
  • processing of documents for delivery according to instructions indicated above.
  • foregoing is true and correct.

  • 15 . PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING MOTION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    STATE BAR
    MOTION
    FERNAND SARRAT
    AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
    STATES DISTRICT COURT
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT
    DEFENDANTS
    WALKER
    VAUGHN
    AMEND
    DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
    HONORABLE VAUGHN
    PLEADINGS
    COUNSEL
    OPPOSITION
    SUPPORT
    ABOVE-CAPTIONED ACTION
    PLAINTIFFS
    HON
    FLOOR
    COURTROOM
    CLASS ACTION
    ORDER GRANTING MOTION
    VRW
    MASTER FILE
    CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
    CALIFORNIA
    NORTHERN DISTRICT
    ATTORNEYS
    
    
       BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
       LEO P. CUNNINGHAM, State Bar No. 121605
       MAURA L. REES, State Bar No. 191698
       WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
       Professional Corporation
       650 Page Mill Road
       Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
       Telephone: (650) 493-9300
       Facsimile: (650) 565-5100
       Attorneys for Defendants
       CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
       IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
       This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS
    
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
    
       Master File No.
       C-98-04292 (VRW)
       (PROPOSED) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED CONSOLIDATED
       COMPLAINT
       BY CYLINK CORPORATION AND FERNAND SARRAT WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND
       CLASS ACTION
       Date: March 29, 2001
       Time: 2:00 p.m.
       Courtroom: 6, 17^th Floor
       Before: Hon. Vaughn R. Walker
    
    
       The motion of defendants Cylink Corporation and Fernand Sarrat for an
       order dismissing them as defendants from Plaintiffs' Amended
       Consolidated Complaint in the above-captioned action came on regularly
       for hearing by the Court. Having reviewed the papers submitted in
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • CA 94304-1050 Telephone: 493-9300 Facsimile: 565-5100 Attorneys for Defendants CYLINK
  • NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
  • Master File No. C-98-04292 (VRW) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED CONSOLIDATED
  • Time: 2:00 p.m. Courtroom: 6, 17^th Floor
  • Before: Hon.
  • The motion of defendants Cylink Corporation and Fernand Sarrat for an order dismissing them
  • Having reviewed the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motion as well as
  • THE HONORABLE VAUGHN R. WALKER
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

  • 16 . NOTICE OF MOTION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SARRAT
    CYLINK
    SCIENTER
    ALLEGE
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    ALLEGATIONS
    PLAINTIFFS
    DEFENDANTS
    AMENDED COMPLAINT FAILS
    A/R TURNOVER RATIOS
    MOTION
    COURT
    REES
    FRAUD
    FACTS
    CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
    SECURITIES
    UNITED STATES
    AUTHORITIES
    FERNAND SARRAT
    WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH
    REFORM ACT
    MEMORANDUM
    ACC
    CALIFORNIA
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    FRAUDULENT
    TRANSACTIONS
    
    
       BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
       LEO P. CUNNINGHAM, State Bar No. 121605
       MAURA L. REES, State Bar No. 191698
       WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
       Professional Corporation
       650 Page Mill Road
       Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
       Telephone: (650) 493-9300
       Facsimile: (650) 565-5100
       Attorneys for Defendants
       CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
       IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
       This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS
    
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
    
       Master File No.
       C-98-04292 (VRW)
       NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
       BY CYLINK CORPORATION AND FERNAND SARRAT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
       AUTHORITIES
       CLASS ACTION
       Date: March 29, 2001
       Time: 2:00 p.m.
       Courtroom: 6, 17^th Floor
       Before: Hon. Vaughn R. Walker
    
    
                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
                                                                         Page
    
       NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION 1
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • CA 94304-1050 Telephone: 493-9300 Facsimile: 565-5100 Attorneys for Defendants CYLINK
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
  • Master File No. C-98-04292 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED CONSOLIDATED
  • The Amended Complaint Fails adequately to allege scienter on the part of Cylink corporation
  • United States v. Bohonus,
  • PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on March 29, 2001, at 2:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter
  • Pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and Fed.
  • This motion is based on this notice of motion and motion, the supporting memorandum of points
  • Does the Amended Complaint state facts creating a strong inference of scienter as to Mr.
  • The court dismissed the first Consolidated Complaint in this action on November 6, 2000 reco
  • The SEC's Complaint provides no support for plaintiffs' claims against Mr. Sarrat and the
  • ACC, 25-27, 31-33.
  • Plaintiffs now allege that Mr. Daws and Mr. Butler were aware of transactions during the
  • Plaintiffs now allege that Mr. Sarrat, Cylink's CEO, reviewed the Company's historical A/R
  • the complaint must "state with particularity facts giving rise to a strong inference" that
  • Cylink's intent to defraud is predicated solely on the theory that the Corporation's scienter
  • 2001 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

  • 17 . DECLARATION OF MAURA L

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    EXHIBIT
    CYLINK
    CALIFORNIA
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    REES
    MAURA
    OPINION
    LAW
    DECLARE
    FERNAND SARRAT
    WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH
    STATE BAR
    COMPLAINT
    SECURITIES
    DISTRICT
    UNITED STATES
    DEFENDANTS
    ATTORNEYS
    PALO ALTO
    ROSATI
    FOREGOING
    AMERICA
    PERJURY
    PENALTY
    GAYLINN
    LITIG
    HALL KINION
    CKS GROUP
    EARNINGS
    
    
       BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
       LEO P. CUNNINGHAM, State Bar No. 121605
       MAURA L. REES, State Bar No. 191698
       WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
       Professional Corporation
       650 Page Mill Road
       Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
       Telephone: (650) 493-9300
       Facsimile: (650) 565-5100
       Attorneys for Defendants
       CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
       IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
       This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS
    
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
       )
    
       Master File No.
       C-98-04292 (VRW)
       DECLARATION OF MAURA L. REES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED
       CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
       BY CYLINK CORPORATION AND FERNAND SARRAT
       CLASS ACTION
       Date: March 29, 2001
       Time: 2:00 p.m.
       Courtroom: 6, 17^th Floor
       Before: Hon. Vaughn R. Walker
    
    
       I, Maura L. Rees, declare as follows:
    
       1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the state of
       California. I am associated with the law firm of Wilson Sonsini
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • CA 94304-1050 Telephone: 493-9300 Facsimile: 565-5100 Attorneys for Defendants CYLINK
  • NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
  • Master File No. C-98-04292 DECLARATION OF MAURA L. REES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
  • I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the state of California.
  • I am associated with the law firm of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, counsel of record for
  • Attached as Exhibit B hereto is a true and correct copy of Cylink Corporation's Form 8-K
  • Attached as Exhibit C hereto is a true and correct copy of Cylink Corporation's fourth
  • Attached as Exhibit D hereto is a true and correct copy of the court's opinion in In re
  • Attached as Exhibit E hereto is a true and correct copy of the court's opinion in In re Hall
  • Attached as Exhibit F hereto is a true and correct copy of the court's opinion in Gaylinn v.
  • I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and the United
  • Executed this 29th day of January, 2001 at Palo Alto, California.

  • 18 . DECLARATION OF MAURA L

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    STATE BAR
    FERNAND SARRAT
    DEFENDANTS
    PALO ALTO
    REES
    MAURA
    CALIFORNIA
    FOREGOING
    AMERICA
    READ-RITE
    VISX
    EAI
    SYS
    NUKO INFO
    PEOPLESOFT
    TESTIFY
    WITNESS
    FACTS SET
    PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE
    COUNSEL
    ROSATI
    WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH
    LAW FIRM
    DECLARATION
    CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION
    ATTORNEYS
    CUNNINGHAM
    LEO
    
     1  BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
           LEO P. CUNNINGHAM, State Bar No. 121605
     2  MAURA L. REES, State Bar No. 191698
           WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
     3  Professional Corporation
           650 Page Mill Road
     4  Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
           Telephone:  (650) 493-9300
     5  Facsimile:   (650) 565-5100
    
     6  Attorneys for Defendants
           CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
     7
     8                                    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
     9                               NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    10
    11                                                         )  Master File No.
                                                               )  C-98-04292 (VRW)
    12                                                         )
              IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION  )  DECLARATION OF MAURA L. REES
    13                                                         )  IN SUPPORT OF REPLY BRIEF RE:
                                                               )  MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED
    14                                                         )  CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
              This Document Relates To:  ALL ACTIONS           )  BY CYLINK CORPORATION AND
    15                                                         )  FERNAND SARRAT
                                                               )
    16                                                         )  CLASS ACTION
                                                               )
    17                                                         )  Date:  April 12, 2001
                                                               )         Time:  2:00 p.m.
    18                                                         )         Courtroom: 6, 17th Floor
                                                               )
    19                                                         )  Before:   Hon. Vaughn R. Walker
    
    20
    
    21
    
    22
    
    23
    
    24
    
    25
    
    26
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
  • LEO P. CUNNINGHAM, State Bar No. 121605
  • Palo Alto,
  • Attorneys for Defendants CYLINK CORPORATION and FERNAND SARRAT
  • IN RE CYLINK SECURITIES LITIGATION) DECLARATION OF MAURA L. REES
  • associated with the law firm of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, counsel of record for
  • I have personal knowledge of the facts set
  • forth herein, and if called as a witness, could and would testify as follows:
  • Peoplesoft, Inc.
  • Nuko Info. Sys., Inc.
  • Sec. Litig., No. C-97-20471 (EAI) (N.D.
  • VISX, Inc.
  • Read-Rite Corp.
  • 17 States of America that the foregoing is true and accurate.
  • 18 at Palo Alto, California.

  • 19 . ORDER

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    REVENUE RECOGNITION
    CYLINK
    PLAINTIFFS ALLEGE
    PSLRA
    DEFENDANTS
    SECURITIES
    PREMATURE REVENUE RECOGNITION
    DISSEMINATIONS OVERSTATED REVENUES
    USC
    PARTICULARITY
    MISSTATEMENTS
    COMPLAINT
    FACTS
    QUARTERLY REPORTS
    INFERENCE
    ACCOUNTING
    DELIBERATELY RECKLESS
    SILICON GRAPHICS
    ALLEGATIONS
    COMMISSION
    DELIBERATE RECKLESSNESS
    INTERNAL CONTROLS
    LITIGATION REFORM ACT
    PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION
    EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    ANNOUNCEMENTS
    ACCOUNTING MISSTATEMENT LITIGATION
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    MAGNITUDE
    
    3
    
    
    
    
            1
    
            2                                                                   NOV  = 6 2000
            3
                                                                            RICHAR3  W.  WIEI
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
     
  • This is accounting misstatement litigation
  • Plaintiffs allege that Cylink through three senior
  • 20 Exchange Commission for those periods.
  • 21 that Cylink's announcements and quarterly reports.
  • 24 of the falsity of those releases with the particularity required
  • 25 the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSLRA).
  • 26 15 USC I§ 78u-4and.
  • the second quarter disseminations overstated revenues by
  • product of the company's premature revenue recognition.
  • such misstatements were material to investors.
  • misstatements were made with "deliberate recklessness" or otherwise
  • Defendants have moved to dismiss
  • the facts needed to show the requisite state of mind.
  • that in light of the internal controls mandated by financial
  • Cylink during the Class Period:
  • Plaintiffs' complaint alleges that Cylink itself and the
  • individual defendants violated sections 10and 20of the
  • See In re Silicon Graphics Inc 19 Securities Litisation, 183 F3d 970, 980 n10.
  • 10 facts giving rise to a strong inference that the defendant acted
  • plead, in great detail, facts that constitute strong circumstantial evidence of deliberately
  • plaintiffs assert that their 19 allegations are "based
  • magnitude reflected in the disseminations was beyond the capability
  • 10 Defendants correctly point out that accounting principles may

  • 20 . DOCKET

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    VDF
    DEFENDANT
    CIVIL ACTION
    ENTRY
    CONSOLIDATED PLAINTIFF
    JUDGE
    ORDER CONSOLIDATING
    BUCHMEYER
    COUNSEL
    REFERENCE MATTER
    DOCKET
    FUTURE PLEADINGS
    ISSUED-4
    MCALEER
    KEVIN
    THOMPSON
    JERE
    CYR
    LEO
    CAPROCK
    HECTOR ALFARO
    DEMAND
    JURY
    ASSIGNMENT
    COURT
    DISTRICT
    CONSOLIDATED LEAD
    SPECIFICS
    JUDGE PAUL STICKNEY
    
    Case docket was last updated on: 09/06/00.
    
    
    Docket as of September 6, 2000 5:11 pm               Page 1
    
    Proceedings include all events.                                   M-STI
    3:00cv1613 Alfaro, et al v. Caprock Comm, et al                          LEAD
                                                                             JURY
                                                                M-STI  LEAD
                                                                JURY
                           U.S. District Court
                   Northern District of Texas (Dallas)
    
                   CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 00-CV-1613
    
    Alfaro, et al v. Caprock Comm, et al                        Filed: 07/26/00
    Assigned to: Chief Judge Jerry Buchmeyer     Jury demand: Plaintiff
    Demand: $0,000                               Nature of Suit:  850
    Lead Docket: None                            Jurisdiction: Federal Question
    Dkt# in other court: None
    
    Cause: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act
    
    
    HECTOR ALFARO, On behalf of       Marc R Stanley, Attorney at Law
    himself and all others            214/443-0358 FAX
    similarly situated                (COR LD NTC ret)
         plaintiff                    Stanley Mandel & Iola
                                      3100 Monticello Ave
                                      Suite 750
                                      Dallas, TX 75205
                                      USA
                                      214/443-4300
    
    
    ANGELA AMOS, On behalf of         Thomas E Bilek, Attorney at Law
    herself and all others            713/227-9404 FAX
    similarly situated                (COR LD NTC ret)
         consolidated plaintiff       Hoeffner Bilek & Eidman
                                      440 Louisiana
                                      Suite 720
                                      Houston, TX 77002-1634
                                      USA
                                      713/227-7720
    
    
    TERESA A CICALA                   Marc R Stanley, Attorney at Law
         consolidated plaintiff       (See above)
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Case docket was last updated on:
  • U.S. District Court
  • Northern District of Texas
  • Assigned to: Chief Judge Jerry Buchmeyer Jury demand: Plaintiff
  • HECTOR ALFARO, On behalf of Marc R Stanley, Attorney at Law
  • consolidated plaintiff Hoeffner Bilek & Eidman
  • CAPROCK COMMUNICATIONS CORP
  • KEVIN W MCALEER
  • defendant Leo J Cyr, defendant Jere W Thompson Jr, Kevin W
  • McAleer (Issued-4) (vdf) (Entry date 07/27/00)
  • 7/26/00 -- PRELIMINARY ASSIGNMENT TO Magistrate Judge Paul Stickney
  • 8/28/00 3 ORDER consolidating cases...The above referenced case is
  • CONSOLIDATED with civil action number 3:00-CV-1730-R and
  • (See order for specifics)
  • 8/28/00 -- Consolidated Lead Case
  • 9/6/00 4 ORDER consolidating cases..The above reference matter is
  • All future pleadings shall be filed
  • Buchmeyer) Copies to counsel: 09/06/00 Page1

  • 21 . ORDER DENYING REQUESTS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    VRW
    PLAINTIFF
    COURT
    ABBEY
    DEFENDANT
    YORK
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    LEAD PLAINTIFF
    COUNSEL
    REJECTION
    BIDDING
    DISTRICT COURT
    WEISS
    CLERK
    REQUEST
    FIRM
    SQUITIERI
    GARDY
    STULL
    CENDANT
    LERACH
    SAN FRANCISCO
    BRODY
    YOURMAN
    PROPOSALS
    TREATMENT
    BASIS
    CLASS ACTION
    COMPETITIVE BIDDING
    
    (filed Nov. 5, 1999)
    
                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
    NANCY WENDERHOLD                   )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4292 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION, et al.,        )
                                       )
                        Defendants.    )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    HAROLD LERNER,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4296 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    CHAD B. POLING,                    )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4360 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
                        Defendant.     )
    ___________________________________)
                                       )
    MAX SILBERMAN,                     )
                                       )
                        Plaintiff,     )   No. C 98-4536 VRW
                                       )
              v.                       )
                                       )
    CYLINK CORPORATION,                )
                                       )
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • Plaintiff,) No. C 98-4292 VRW
  • Defendant.
  • Gardy & Squitieri for appointment as class
  • counsel in this case.
  • By letter dated October 27, 1999, the Abbey
  • firm raised two objections to the court's order:
  • the rejected bid; second, the firm argued that it should have the
  • point would defeat a primary objective of the competitive bidding
  • Rejection rendered the bid a nullity in all respects except
  • Abbey's request that the court strike
  • the next round of bidding.
  • perceive no basis for the preferential treatment Abbey desires.
  • proposals is tantamount to no bid at all and provides no
  • But lead plaintiff in this case,
  • for lead plaintiffs' choice of representation in Cendant.
  • plaintiff lawyers in class action litigation.
  • Nancy Wenderhold v Cylink Corporation,
  • I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
  • Kevin Yourman Jordan Lurie Behram Parekh
  • WEISS & YOURMAN
  • STULL, STULL & BRODY
  • East 45th Street New York,
  • ABBEY, GARDY & SQUITIERI
  • San Francisco, CA 94105
  • MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD HYNES & LERACH

  • 22 . REPLY MEMO IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO APPOINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    LEAD PLAINTIFFS
    DEFENDANTS
    PROPOSED LEAD PLAINTIFFS
    CLASS MEMBERS
    CYLINK
    COURT
    APPOINTMENT
    CONSOLIDATION
    VRW
    SUPP
    MEMORANDUM
    DAWS
    JOHN
    FERNAND
    CYLINK CORPORATION
    ADEQUACY
    SECURITIES
    MOTION
    SARRAT
    AGGREGATION
    LITIG
    PRELIMINARY SHOWING
    CLASS PERIOD
    DISTRICT COURT
    LOSSES
    TYPICALITY
    PSLRA
    STATUTE
    PURPORTED CLASS
    
    JAMES JAY SEIRMARCO (#194307)
    ABBEY, GARDY & SQUITERI, LLP
    595 Market Street, Suite 2500
    San Francisco, CA 94105
    Telephone: (415) 538-3725
    
    MARK C. GARDY
    STEPHEN J. FEARON, JR.
    ABBEY, GARDY & SQUITERI, LLP
    212 East 39th Street
    New York, NY 10016
    Telephone (212) 889-3700
    
    ROBERT C. SCHUBERT (#62684)
    JUDEN JUSTICE REED (#153748)
    WILLEM F. JONCKHEER (#178748)
    SCHUBERT & REED LLP
    Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1050
    San Francisco, CA 94111
    Telephone: (415) 788-4220
    
    Attorneys for Class Member Movants
    (Additional counsel appear on signature page)
    
                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    
    NANCY WENDERHOLD, on behalf of |    No. 98-CV-04292 (VRW)
    herself and all others         |
    similarly situated,            |
                                   |
                   Plaintiff,      | Date: February 12, 1999
                                   | Time: 10:30 a.m.
    v.                             | Courtroom: Hon. Vaughn Walker
                                   |
    CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B. |
    SARRAT, JOHN H. DAWS and       |
    HOWARD MORGAN,                 |
                                   |
                   Defendants.     |
    _______________________________|
    HAROLD LERNER, on behalf of    |    No. 98-CV-04296 (VRW)
    himslef and all others         |
    similarly situated,            |
                                   |
                   Plaintiff,      |
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • on behalf of | No. 98-CV-04292 (VRW)
  • CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B. |
  • SARRAT,
  • Defendants.
  • CYLINK CORPORATION, JOHN H. |
  • DAWS and FERNAND SERRAT, |
  • CLASS MEMBER MOVANTS' REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO APPOINT CERTAIN OF THE CLASS
  • PLAINTIFFS AGREE TO A CONSOLIDATION ORDER BASED ON THE NORTHERN DISTRICT'S MODEL ORDER.
  • Model Consolidation Order for Securities Fraud Class Actions
  • alerting any members of the purported class that they may step
  • As required by statute, plaintiffs in the Wenderhold action,
  • of intra-class conflicts among class members having purchased at
  • different intervals throughout the class period.
  • PROPOSED LEAD PLAINTIFFS HAVE MADE THE REQUISITE SHOWING OF ADEQUACY FOR APPOINTMENT AS LEAD
  • Gluck v. Cellstar Corp., 976 F. Supp.
  • the PSLRA specifically provides that "the court shall
  • A proposed lead plaintiff need only make a preliminary showing
  • make a preliminary showing of typicality.
  • AGGREGATION OF SHAREHOLDER LOSSES IS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED BY THE PSLRA.
  • Sec. Litig., No. C-97-20059-RMW, slip op.

  • 23 . MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CONSOLIDATE
    COURT
    DEFENDANTS
    PLAINTIFF
    YORK
    MOTION
    VRW
    DISTRICT
    CIVIL PROCEDURE
    LAW
    FEDERAL RULES
    CALIFORNIA
    SECURITIES
    COMMON QUESTIONS
    PURSUANT
    PURPOSES
    FERNAND
    LLP
    SAN FRANCISCO
    GARDY
    ANNOUNCEMENTS
    PENDING
    MOVANTS
    SUITE
    JUDGES
    ACT
    PARTIES
    VASSILAKOS
    SARRAT
    
    ABBEY, GARDY & SQUITIERI, LLP
    James Jay Seirmarco (194307)
    595 Market Street - Suite 2500
    San Francisco, California 94105
    (415) 538-3725
         -and-
    Mark C. Gardy
    Stephen J. Fearon, Jr.
    212 East 39th Street
    New York, New York 10016
    (212) 889-3700
    
    Attorneys for Class Member Movants
    (Additional counsel appear on signature page)
    
    
                       UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    NANCY WENDERHOLD, on behalf of      )   Case No.
    herself and all others similarly    )   98-CV-04292 (VRW)
    situated,                           )
                                        )
                       Plaintiff,       )
                                        )   Date: February 12, 1999
             -against-                  )   Time: 10:30 a.m.
                                        )
    CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B.      )   Courtroom:
    SARRAT, JOHN H. DAWS and            )   Hon. Vaughn R. Walker
    HOWARD MORGAN,                      )   Courtroom No. 3, 17th Fl.
                                        )   450 Golden Gate Avenue
                       Defendants.      )   San Francisco, CA 94102
    -------------------------------------
    HAROLD LERNER, on behalf of         )   Case No.
    himself and all others similarly    )   98-CV-04296 (VRW)
    situated,                           )
                                        )
                       Plaintiff,       )
                                        )
             -against-                  )
                                        )
    CYLINK CORPORATION, JOHN H. DAWS    )
    and FERNAND B. SARRAT,              )
                                        )
                       Defendants.      )
    -------------------------------------
    CHAD B. POLING, on behalf of        )   Case No.
    himself and all others similarly    )   98-CV-04360 (VRW)
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • ABBEY, GARDY & SQUITIERI, LLP
  • San Francisco, California 94105
  • New York, New York 10016
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
  • on behalf of) Case No. herself and all others similarly) 98-CV-04292 (VRW)
  • Plaintiff,)
  • CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B.) Courtroom:
  • Defendants.
  • CYLINK CORPORATION, FERNAND B.) SARRAT, THOMAS L. BUTLER, JOHN H.)
  • HARRY VASSILAKOS on behalf of) Case No. himself and all others similarly) 98-CV-04603
  • THE CLASS MEMBER MOVANTS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES FOR ALL PURPOSES
  • ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD
  • This Motion is brought pursuant to Rule 42 of the Federal
  • Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds that the seven related
  • questions of fact and law.
  • Following defendants' announcements, these seven securities
  • Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.
  • duplication of labor if heard by different judges or might create
  • Rule 42of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows
  • When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may
  • Civil Procedure is proper when actions involve common questions
  • Suite 2500