Sign In
QCOM.US
id: 1249

Qualcomm (QCOM) Investor Settlement

S.D. California
Court
3:17-cv-00121
Case number
01 Feb 2012
Class period Start
20 Jan 2017
Class period End
Qualcomm reached a settlement with $QCOM investors over claims related to anticompetitive practices and weak financial reporting controls.

Outline

Back in 2017, the news reported that Qualcomm was overcharging for licenses and refusing to sell chips to companies that didn't agree to their terms. Following this, $QCOM dropped significantly, leading to a lawsuit from investors.

Timeline
  • On January 17, 2017: The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against Qualcomm.
  • On January 18, 2017: Many news also reported the unfair practices of Qualcomm.
  • On January 19, 2017: Following this news, $QCOM dropped 18.3%.
  • On January 23, 2017: Qualcomm faced a lawsuit from investors.
Background

In January 2017, the FTC filed a complaint against Qualcomm for using anticompetitive tactics.

It involved overcharging for licenses, refusing chip sales to some manufacturers, and offering lower royalties to companies like Apple for exclusive chip use.

Following the FTC's complaint, many news reported on Qualcomm's practices.

Bloomberg stated that Qualcomm "offered reduced royalty fees to Apple in exchange for using its baseband processors exclusively," highlighting the company's unfair competitive practices.

Another news portal, Engadget, also noted that Qualcomm "refuses to license its patents to competitors, which goes against its commitment to 'FRAND' licensing tactics."

By January 19, 2017, $QCOM dropped by about 18.3%.

On January 23, 2017, investors filed a class action lawsuit against Qualcomm for anticompetitive market practices and weak financial reporting controls that led to an FTC complaint.

What can investors expect now?

Qualcomm reached a settlement with $QCOM investors over claims related to anticompetitive practices and weak financial reporting controls.

If you were damaged due to this situation, you can file for a payout and get your share of the settlement. You can check if you are eligible and other details in the FAQ section below.
Case Status
Stipulative Settlement
Alleged Offence
Mismanagement
Misleading Statements
Omissions
Suspected Party
Directors
Management
Security Type
Stocks
Trade Direction
Long
Payout per Share
0.47
Filing date
23 January 2017
Plaintiffs
Rasesh Shah
Attorneys
Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Motley Rice LLC
Defendants
Steve Mollenkopf, Paul E. Jacobs, George S. Davis, William Keitel, Derek K. Aberle, Steven Altman, Donald Rosenberg, William F. Davidson, Jr.,
Judge
Jinsook Ohta
Attorney fee
$18,033,332
Trades matching type
FIFO
+$47,500,000
Cash Settlement Amount

Frequently Asked Questions