class action lawsuit

Oct 3 2007

A Class Action lawsuit being prepared against Apple for bricking iPhones

The Law Office of Damian R. Fernandez and The Law Office of M. Van Smith have launched a Class Action suit against Apple and are currently seeking contact with California residents that match any the following criteria:

  • You own an iPhone and you want to transfer to a wireless carrier other than AT&T. You fall into this category even if you did not unlock your iPhone or have your iPhone disabled by an iPhone update.

  • Your iPhone was disabled, malfunctioned, or you had third-party applications erased after you downloaded iPhone update 1.1.1.
  • You contacted Apple to repair your iPhone and Apple refused to honor your warranty because you did any one the following: (1) unlocked your iPhone, or (2) installed a third party application.
  • You incurred a cancellation fee from your previous wireless carrier when you transferred to AT&T’s wireless service.
  • You incurred roaming charges while travelling abroad with your iPhone.
  • You purchased a third-party warranty at extra cost for your iPhone because of Apple’s released statement that it will not honor warranties on unlocked iPhones.

Visit appleiphonelawsuit.com for more information.

[ Via HardMac ]

Note:

By admin • elsewhere, General News, News • Comments Off • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sep 5 2006

Brower Piven Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against Apple

The law firm of Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation, today announced that a securities class action was commenced on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Apple Computer, Inc. between December 1, 2005 and August 11, 2006, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against defendant Apple and one or more of its officers and/or directors. The action charges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the Class Period, which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company’s securities.

No class has yet been certified in the above action. If you are a member of the proposed class, you may retain counsel of your choice, and you may move the court no later than October 24, 2006 to serve as a lead plaintiff for the proposed class. In order to serve as a lead plaintiff, you must meet certain legal requirements. To be a member of the proposed class you need not take any action at this time.

If you acquired shares (or purchased call options or sold put options) of Apple Computer, Inc. during the Class Period indicated and want to discuss your legal rights, you may e-mail or call Brower Piven, who will, without obligation or cost to you, attempt to answer your questions. David Brower and Charles Piven have combined experience in securities and class action litigation of over 40 years. You may contact Brower Piven at The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by email at hoffman@browerpiven.com or by calling 410/986-0036.

Note:

By admin • General News, News, upr • Comments Off • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Aug 30 2006

Schatz & Nobel, P.C. announces class action lawsuit against Apple Computer, Inc.

The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all persons who purchased the securities of Apple Computer, Inc. between December 1, 2005 and August 11, 2006, inclusive.
The Complaint alleges that Apple, and certain of its officers and directors, violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false statements and omissions concerning Apple’s practice of backdating stock options. This improper backdating masked the virtually instant profits the option recipients obtained. Under generally accepted accounting principles, these profits were required to be recognized as an expense in the Company’s financial statements for the appropriate period, but were not. Thus, the Company’s financial statements in its Form 10-K filing for the fiscal year 2005 and interim financial statements for 2005 and 2006 were materially false and misleading. In addition, the Company’s Proxy Statement for its annual shareholder meeting held in 2006 was materially false and misleading because it contained statements concealing Apple’s practice of backdating stock options.

If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than October 24, 2006, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class. A lead plaintiff is a class member that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Although your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision whether or not to seek appointment as a lead plaintiff, lead plaintiffs make important decisions which could affect the overall recovery for class members, including decisions concerning settlement. The securities laws require the Court to consider the class member(s) with the largest financial interest as presumptively the most adequate lead plaintiff(s).

While Schatz & Nobel has not filed a lawsuit against the defendants, to view a copy of the Complaint initiating the class action or for more information about the case, class action cases in general, and your rights, please contact Schatz & Nobel toll-free at (800) 797-5499, or by e-mail at sn06106@aol.com, or visit our website: www.snlaw.net.
Note:

By admin • General News, News, upr • Comments Off • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1 2