Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Poly


Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Polycom, Inc.

WILMINGTON, Del.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.:

  • Do you, or did you, own shares of Polycom, Inc. (NASDAQ GS:PLCM)?

  • Did you purchase your shares before July 24, 2012, or between July 24, 2012 and July 23, 2013, inclusive?

  • Did you lose money in your investment in Polycom, Inc.?

  • Do you want to discuss your rights?

Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., including former Special Assistant United States Attorney, Timothy J. MacFall, announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of Polycom, Inc. ("Polycom" or the "Company") (NASDAQ GS: PLCM) between July 24, 2012 and July 23, 2013, inclusive (the "Class Period"), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers (the "Complaint").

If you purchased shares of Polycom during the Class Period and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, NY at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to info@rl-legal.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/polycom-inc-plcm.

Polycom is a global leader in open, standards-based unified communications and collaboration (UC&C) solutions for voice and video collaboration. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and omitted materially adverse facts, about the Company's business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants concealed from the investing public that: (1) the Company's Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") had been submitting inappropriate and irregular expense submissions; (2) the Company's CEO was violating the Company's code of conduct and was subject to dismissal at all relevant times; (3) the Company did not have effective internal controls over their business operations thus materially impacting the Company's current and previous financial statements; (4) the CEO's improper conduct created a risk that he would be terminated from the Company, jeopardizing the Company's future success; and (5) as a result of the above, the Company's financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. As a result of defendants' false and misleading statements, the Company's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.

According to the Complaint, throughout the Class Period, the Company's CEO, Andrew Miller ("Miller"), submitted irregular and suspect expense submissions. The Company, however, failed to detect this behavior, or chose to overlook the evidence of such behavior, thereby placing at risk the Company's assets, and demonstrating a weakness in the Company's internal controls, and audit and financial reporting structures. On July 23, 2013, Polycom announced that its CEO had resigned after the board found "irregularities" in his expense submissions. The Company stated that Miller accepted responsibility for his actions.

On this news, shares in Polycom dropped more than 15%, closing at $9.50 per share on July 24, 2013, from a close of $11.18 per share on July 23, 2013, on unusually heavy trading volume of over 14 million shares.

Moreover, on the eve of the Company publicly announcing that Miller had accepted responsibility for submitting improper expense reimbursement requests and announcing that Miller had submitted his resignation related to this misconduct, Miller entered into a "Separation Agreement and Release" with Polycom, under which Miller was promised a $500,000 cash payment, assured continued eligibility for a bonus for the first half of 2013, promised a year's reimbursement (through another cash payment) of COBRA expenses, and allowed to keep expensive company computer and mobile telecommunications equipment. The Separation Agreement and Release also allowed Miller to remain a Polycom "employee" through August 15, 2013, and continue to receive his normal base salary. Miller was allowed to remain an "employee" until August 15, 2013 so that he could be awarded yet more compensation, in the form of 50,000 shares of Company stock through a Restricted Stock Unit Award, and potentially as much as an additional 75,000 shares of Company stock through a Performance Share Award.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 24, 2013. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

While Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. did not file the Complaint in this matter, the firm, with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.
Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire
Peter Allocco
Fax: 302-654-7530

KEYWORDS: United States North America California Delaware New York


The article Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Polycom, Inc. originally appeared on Fool.com.

Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 - 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Originally published