Motorola 2005 Annual Report Download - page 39

32
compensatory damages. On October 12, 2004, the court granted Motorola's motion to dismiss, holding that there is
no civil liability under the federal securities laws for aiding and abetting. On October 26, 2004, the plaintiff filed a
motion for the reconsideration of the court's decision. On December 20, 2004, the court issued its ruling denying
plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of its earlier decision to dismiss the complaint against Motorola. The court
issued a final judgment dismissing Motorola from the case on February 15, 2005. Plaintiff appealed to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. An oral argument was held on that appeal on December 12, 2005.
In re Adelphia Communications Corp. Securities and Derivative Litigation
On December 22, 2003, Motorola was named as a defendant in two cases relating to the In re Adelphia
Communications Corp. Securities and Derivative Litigation (the ""Adelphia MDL''). The Adelphia MDL consists
of at least fourteen individual cases and one purported class action that were filed in or have been transferred to
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. First, Motorola was named as a defendant
in the Second Amended Complaint in the individual case of W.R. Huff Asset Management Co. L.L.C. v. Deloitte &
Touche LLP, et al. (the ""Huff Complaint'') This case was originally filed by W.R. Huff Asset Management Co.
L.L.C. on June 7, 2002, in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York and was
subsequently transferred to the Southern District of New York as related to the Adelphia MDL. Several other
individual and corporate defendants are also named in the amended complaint along with Motorola.
As to Motorola, the complaint alleges a claim arising under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder relating to Adelphia securities, and seeks recovery of the
consideration paid by plaintiff for Adelphia debt securities, compensatory damages, costs and expenses of litigation
and other relief. Motorola filed a motion to dismiss this complaint on March 8, 2004 which is awaiting decision.
Also on December 22, 2003, Motorola was named as a defendant in Stocke v. John J. Rigas, et al. This case
was originally filed in Pennsylvania and was subsequently transferred to the Southern District of New York as
related to the Adelphia MDL. Several other individual and corporate defendants are also named in the amended
complaint along with Motorola. As to Motorola, the complaint generally makes the same allegations as the Huff
Complaint and a state law claim of aiding and abetting fraud relating to Adelphia securities. The complaint seeks
return of the consideration paid by plaintiff for Adelphia securities, punitive damages and other relief. Motorola
filed a motion to dismiss this complaint on April 12, 2004 which is awaiting decision.
On July 23, 2004, Motorola was named as a defendant in Argent Classic Convertible Arbitrage Fund L.P.,
et al. v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., et al. (the ""Argent Complaint''). The Argent Complaint was filed against Scientific
Atlanta and Motorola in the Southern District of New York. The Argent Complaint generally makes the same
allegations as the other previously-disclosed cases relating to the In re Adelphia Communications Corp. Securities
and Derivative Litigation that have been transferred to the Southern District of New York. The complaint seeks
compensatory damages and other relief. On October 12, 2004, Motorola filed a motion to dismiss the Argent
Complaint which is awaiting decision.
On September 14, 2004, Motorola was named in a complaint filed in state court in Los Angeles, California,
naming Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta and certain officers of Scientific-Atlanta, Los Angeles County Employees
Retirement Association et al. v. Motorola, Inc., et al. The complaint raises claims under California law for aiding
and abetting fraud and conspiracy to defraud and generally makes the same allegations as the other previously-
disclosed cases relating to the In re Adelphia Communications Corp. Securities and Derivative Litigation that have
been transferred to the Southern District of New York. There are no new substantive allegations. The complaint
seeks compensatory damages, opportunity-cost damages, punitive and other exemplary damages and other relief. On
October 8, 2004, Motorola filed a motion to remove the California state court case to federal court in California.
On December 1, 2004, the Multi-District Litigation Panel issued a conditional transfer order transferring the case to
federal court in New York. Plaintiffs did not object to the conditional transfer order, and the order transferring the
case to New York is now final. On September 19, 2005, Motorola filed a motion to dismiss the complaint in this
action which is awaiting decision.
On October 25, 2004, Motorola was named in a complaint filed in state court in Fulton County, Georgia,
naming Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta and certain officers of Scientific-Atlanta, AIG DKR SoundShore Holdings,
Ltd., et al. v. Scientific-Atlanta Inc., et al. The complaint raises claims under Georgia law of conspiracy to defraud
and generally makes the same allegations as the other previously disclosed cases relating to the In re Adelphia
Communications Corp. Securities and Derivative Litigation that have already been filed and transferred to the
Southern District of New York. The complaint seeks damages and statutory compensation, punitive damages and
other relief. On November 22, 2004, Motorola filed a petition to remove the state court case to federal court in