In Re Valence Technology, Inc. Securities Litigation
Opinion
Opinion
Ware, J.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
This case concerns whether a magazine article about questionable business practices starts the running of the statute of limitations for a securities fraud action based on those same questionable business practices. On July 14,1997, Special Master Paul Valentine submitted a Recommendation to grant Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the grounds that Plaintiffs’ securities fraud claims are barred by the applicable one-year statute of limitations. Plaintiffs’ objections to the Special Master’s Recommendation were heard by the Court on September 22, 1997. Patrick Coughlin appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs. Robert Feldman, Tower Snow, John Missing, and James Lico appeared on behalf of Defendants. Based upon all pleadings filed to date, as well as the comments of counsel at the hearing, and after de novo review, the Court GRANTS summary judgment in favor of the Defendants.
II. BACKGROUND
This is a securities class action suit brought on behalf of all persons who purchased the securities of Valence Technology, Inc. (“Valence” or the “Company”) between May 7, 1992 and August 10, 1994. Plaintiffs allege…