HP 2011 Annual Report Download - page 155

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
Note 18: Litigation and Contingencies (Continued)
Stockholder Litigation. As described below, HP is involved in stockholder litigation commenced
against certain current and former HP executive officers and certain current and former members of
the HP Board of Directors in which the plaintiffs are seeking to recover certain compensation paid by
HP to the defendants and other damages:
•Heather M. Bendit, et al. v. Mark V. Hurd, et al. (formerly Henrietta Klein v. Mark V. Hurd, et al.),
is a lawsuit filed on September 24, 2010 in California Superior Court alleging the individual
defendants wasted corporate assets and breached their fiduciary duties by failing to implement
and oversee HP’s compliance with the FCPA.
•Saginaw Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Marc L. Andreessen, et al., is a lawsuit filed on October 19,
2010 in United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging, among
other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties and were unjustly enriched by
consciously disregarding HP’s alleged violations of the FCPA.
•A.J. Copeland v. Raymond J. Lane, et al., is a lawsuit filed on March 7, 2011 in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California alleging, among other things, that the
defendants breached their fiduciary duties and wasted corporate assets in connection with HP’s
alleged violations of the FCPA, severance payments made to former Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer Mark Hurd, and HP’s acquisition of 3PAR Inc. The lawsuit also alleges
violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act in connection with HP’s 2010 and 2011 proxy
statements.
•Richard Gammel v. Hewlett-Packard Company, et al., is a putative securities class action filed on
September 13, 2011 in the United States Court for the Central District of California alleging,
among other things, that from November 22, 2010 to August 18, 2011, the defendants violated
Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by concealing material
information and making false statements about HP’s business model and the future of webOS,
the TouchPad and HP’s PC business.
•Ernesto Espinoza v. L´ eo Apotheker, et al., is a lawsuit filed on September 21, 2011 in the United
States Court for the Central District of California alleging, among other things, that the
defendants violated Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by
concealing material information and making false statements about HP’s business model and the
future of webOS, the TouchPad and HP’s PC business. The lawsuit also alleges that the
defendants breached their fiduciary duties, wasted corporate assets and were unjustly enriched
when they authorized the Company’s repurchase of its own stock on August 29, 2010 and
July 21, 2011.
•Larry Salat v. L´ eo Apotheker, et al., is a lawsuit filed on September 21, 2011 in the United States
Court for the Central District of California alleging, among other things, that the defendants
violated Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by concealing material
information and making false statements about HP’s business model and the future of webOS,
the TouchPad and HP’s PC business. The lawsuit also alleges that the defendants breached their
fiduciary duties, wasted corporate assets and were unjustly enriched when they authorized the
Company’s repurchase of its own stock on August 29, 2010 and July 21, 2011.
•Luis Gonzalez v. L´ eo Apotheker, et al., is a lawsuit filed on September 29, 2011 in California
Superior Court alleging, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties,
147