LeapFrog 2004 Annual Report Download - page 25

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 25 of the 2004 LeapFrog annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 160

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123
  • 124
  • 125
  • 126
  • 127
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • 137
  • 138
  • 139
  • 140
  • 141
  • 142
  • 143
  • 144
  • 145
  • 146
  • 147
  • 148
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 152
  • 153
  • 154
  • 155
  • 156
  • 157
  • 158
  • 159
  • 160

Stockholder Class Action
On December 2, 2003, a class action complaint entitled Miller v. LeapFrog Enterprises, Inc., et al.,
No. 03-5421 RMW, was filed in federal district court for the Northern District of California against LeapFrog
and certain of its current and former officers and directors alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, or 1934 Act. Subsequently, three similar actions were filed in the same court: Weil v. LeapFrog
Enterprises, Inc., et al., No. 03-5481 MJJ; Abrams v. LeapFrog Enterprises Inc., et al., No. 03-5486 MJJ; and
Ornelas v. LeapFrog Enterprises, Inc., et al., No. 03-5593 SBA. Each of those complaints purports to be a class
action lawsuit brought on behalf of persons who acquired our Class A common stock during the period of July
24, 2003 through October 21, 2003. On February 18, 2004, the plaintiff in the Weil action amended her
complaint and now seeks to maintain a class action on behalf of persons who acquired our Class A common
stock during the period of July 24, 2003 through February 10, 2004. All of the complaints allege that the
defendants caused us to make false and misleading statements about our business and forecasts about our
financial performance, and that certain of our individual officers and directors sold portions of their stock
holdings while in the possession of adverse, non-public information. The Weil complaint also alleges that our
financial statements were false and misleading. The complaints do not specify the amount of damages sought.
The court has not yet appointed a lead class plaintiff, and a consolidated complaint has not been filed. Discovery
has not commenced and no trial date has been set. We anticipate that all of the actions will ultimately be
consolidated into one action and that a consolidated amended complaint will be filed after the appointment of a
lead plaintiff.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
No matters were submitted to our stockholders during the fourth quarter of our 2004 fiscal year.
18