HP 2013 Annual Report Download - page 162

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
Note 17: Litigation and Contingencies (Continued)
from June 1, 2011 to August 18, 2011. The parties commenced mediation before a private
mediator on December 3, 2013.
•Ernesto Espinoza v. L´ eo Apotheker, et al. and Larry Salat v. L´ eo Apotheker, et al. are consolidated
lawsuits filed on September 21, 2011 in the United States District Court for the Central District
of California alleging, among other things, that the defendants violated Section 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Exchange Act 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 lawsuits also
allege that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties, wasted corporate assets and were
unjustly enriched when they authorized HP’s repurchase of its own stock on August 29, 2010 and
July 21, 2011. These lawsuits were previously stayed pending developments in the Gammel
matter, but those stays have been lifted. The Plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint
on August 21, 2013, and, on October 28, 2013, the defendants filed a motion to stay these
matters.
•Luis Gonzalez v. L´ eo Apotheker, et al. and Richard Tyner v. L´ eo Apotheker, et al. are consolidated
lawsuits filed on September 29, 2011 and October 5, 2011, respectively, in California Superior
Court alleging, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties, wasted
corporate assets and were unjustly enriched 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 and by authorizing HP’s repurchase of its own stock on August 29, 2010 and July 21,
2011. The lawsuits are currently stayed pending resolution of the Espinoza/Salat consolidated
action in federal court.
•Cement & Concrete Workers District Council Pension Fund v. Hewlett-Packard Company, et al. is a
putative securities class action filed on August 3, 2012 in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California alleging, among other things, that from November 13, 2007 to
August 6, 2010 the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act by making
statements regarding HP’s Standards of Business Conduct (‘‘SBC’’) that were false and
misleading because Mr. Hurd, who was serving as HP’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
during that period, had been violating the SBC and concealing his misbehavior in a manner that
jeopardized his continued employment with HP. On February 7, 2013, the defendants moved to
dismiss the amended complaint. On August 9, 2013, the court granted the defendants’ motion to
dismiss with leave to amend the complaint by September 9, 2013. The plaintiffs filed an
amended complaint on September 9, 2013, and the defendants moved to dismiss that complaint
on October 24, 2013. A hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss is scheduled for January 23,
2014.
Autonomy-Related Legal Matters
Investigations. As a result of the findings of an ongoing investigation, HP has provided
information to the U.K. Serious Fraud Office, the U.S. Department of Justice and the SEC related to
the accounting improprieties, disclosure failures and misrepresentations at Autonomy that occurred
prior to and in connection with HP’s acquisition of Autonomy. On November 21, 2012, representatives
of the U.S. Department of Justice advised HP that they had opened an investigation relating to
Autonomy. On February 6, 2013, representatives of the U.K. Serious Fraud Office advised HP that they
154