Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Joel Krieger, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Atheros Communications

December 12, 2011

JOEL KRIEGER, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ATHEROS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.; DR. WILLY C. SHIH; R. TERESA H. MENG; DR.
CRAIG H BARRATT; ANDREW S. RAPPAPORT; DAN A. ARTUSI; CHARLES E.
HARRIS; MARSHALL L. MOHR; CHRISTINE KING; QUALLCOM INC.; AND T MERGER SUB, INC.,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

ORDER APPOINTING LEAD PLAINTIFF AND LEAD COUNSEL

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

Before the Court is Plaintiff's unopposed motion to approve lead plaintiff and lead counsel.

ECF No. 52. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds this matter appropriate for 19 determination without oral argument. Accordingly, the hearing on the motion set for December 15, 20 2011, is hereby VACATED. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's unopposed motion is 21 GRANTED. 22

I.Background

Plaintiff Joel Krieger filed a private securities class action complaint, on behalf of himself 24 and similarly situated shareholders of Atheros Communications, Inc. ("Atheros"), against 25 Defendants Atheros, Dr. Willy C. Shih, Dr. Teresa H. Meng, Dr. Craig H. Barratee, Andrew S. 26 Rappaport, Dan A. Artusi, Charles E. Harris, Marshall L. Mohr, Christine King, Qualcomm Inc., 27 and T Merger Sub, Inc. (collectively "Defendants"). ECF No. 1 ("Compl."). The initial complaint 28 contained individual federal securities law claims and class state law claims. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on June 30, 2011, asserting class claims under federal securities laws. ECF 2 No. 50 ("FAC"). The FAC alleges that Defendants violated Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the 3 9(a), by issuing a definitive merger proxy that contained information regarding the merger between 5 FAC ¶¶ 112-118. 7

8 plaintiff and for approval of the law firm of Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP as lead counsel in this action. 9

Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78n(a), 78t(a), and SEC Rule 14a-9, 17 C.F.R. § 240.14a-4

Atheros and Qualcomm that Defendants should have known was materially false and misleading. 6

On September 16, 2011, Plaintiff moved the Court for appointment of Joel Krieger as lead

ECF No. 52, 53. No other individuals have sought to be named lead plaintiff nor have any other 10 law firms sought to be named lead counsel. Having considered the motion, and for good cause 14 selection of a lead plaintiff in private securities class actions. In the PSLRA's own words, this 15 plaintiff is to be the "most capable of adequately representing the interests of class members." 15 16 U.S.C. § 78u--4(a)(3)(B)(i). Under the PSLRA, a three-step process determines the lead plaintiff. 17

In re Cavanaugh, 306 F.3d 726, 729 (9th Cir. 2002). First, the first plaintiff to file an action 18 governed by the PSLRA must publicize the pendency of the action, the claims made, and the 19 purported class period "in a widely circulated national business-oriented publication or wire 20 service." 15 U.S.C. § 78u--4(a)(3)(A)(i)(I).*fn1 This notice must also alert the public that "any 21 member of the purported class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff." 15 U.S.C. § 78u-22 shown, the Court GRANTS the motion.

II.Legal Standard

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act ("PSLRA"), 15 U.S.C. ยง 78u--4, governs ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.