AMD 1993 Annual Report Download - page 20

16
By order dated October 13, 1993, these five cases, as well as any
subsequently filed cases, were consolidated under the caption "In Re Advanced
Micro Devices Securities Litigation", with the lead case for the consolidated
actions being Samuel Sinay v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., et al., (No.
C-93-20662-JW, N.D. Cal). A consolidated amended class action complaint was
filed on December 3, 1993, containing all the claims described above and an
additional allegation that the Corporation made false and misleading statements
about its revenues and earnings during the third quarter of its 1993 fiscal
year. The amended complaint seeks damages in an unspecified amount. On January
14, 1994, the Company filed a motion to dismiss various claims in the amended
and consolidated class action complaint. The motion to dismiss is currently
scheduled for hearing on March 25, 1994. The Company has responded to initial
document requests and interrogatories, but has not yet produced documents. No
depositions have been taken. This case is in the early stage of discovery. The
Corporation believes that the ultimate outcome of this litigation will not have
a material adverse effect upon the financial condition or trends in results of
operations of the Corporation.
10. George A. Bilunka, et al. v. Sanders, et al. (93-20727JW, N.D. Cal.).
On September 30, 1993, an AMD shareholder, George A. Bilunka, purported to
commence an action derivatively on the Corporation's behalf against all of the
Corporation's directors and certain of the Corporation's officers. The
Corporation is named as a nominal defendant. This purported derivative action
essentially alleges that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary
duties to the Corporation by causing, or permitting, the Corporation to make
allegedly false and misleading statements about the Corporation's development of
its 486SX personal computer microprocessor products, and the extent to which
that development process included access to Intel's 386 microcode. The action
alleges that a pre-suit demand on the Corporation's Board of Directors would
have been futile because of alleged director involvement. Damages are sought
against the individual defendants in an unspecified amount.
On November 10, 1993, the Corporation, as nominal defendant, filed a motion
to dismiss the action for failure to make a demand upon the Corporation's Board
of Directors. The plaintiff then filed an amended derivative complaint on
December 17, 1993. The Corporation has again moved to dismiss the complaint. The
motion was heard on February 4, 1994, and on March 1, 1994 the Court denied the
motion. The Corporation believes that the ultimate outcome of this litigation
will not have a material adverse effect upon the financial condition or trends
in results of operations of the Corporation.
11. SEC Investigation. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has
notified the Corporation that it is conducting an informal investigation of the
Corporation into the Corporation's disclosures about the development of its
Am486SX products. The Corporation is cooperating fully with the SEC.
12. Other Matters. The Corporation is a defendant or plaintiff in various
other actions which arose in the normal course of business. In the opinion of
management, the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have a material
adverse effect on the financial condition or overall trends in the results of
operations of the Corporation.
15
Source: ADVANCED MICRO DEVIC, 10-K, March 07, 1994