Defendant Name: Microtune, Inc.

Defendant Type: Public Company
SIC Code: 3674
CUSIP: 59514P10

Initial Case Details

Legal Case Name SEC v. Microtune, Inc., Douglas J. Bartek and Nancy A. Richardson
First Document Date 30-Jun-2008
Initial Filing Format Civil Proceeding
Case Number 08-cv-01105
Allegation Type Issuer Reporting and Disclosure
Federal District Court Texas, Northern District of Texas

Violations Alleged

Exchange Act
• Sec 10(b) + Rule 10b-5
• Rule 12b-20
• Sec 13(a)
• Rule 13a-1
• Rule 13a-13
• Sec 13(b)(2)(A)
• Sec 13(b)(2)(B)
• Sec 14(a)
• Rule 14a-9
Securities Act
• Sec 17(a)(1)
• Sec 17(a)(2)
• Sec 17(a)(3)
• Sec 17(a) (Not specified)
Additionally, Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 10(b) + Rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 10(b) + Rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 12b-20 of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 12b-20 of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 13(a) of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 13(a) of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 13a-1 of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 13a-1 of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 13a-13 of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 13a-13 of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 13(b)(2)(A) of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 13(b)(2)(A) of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 14(a) of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Sec 14(a) of the Exchange Act.
Douglas Bartek is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 14a-9 of the Exchange Act.
Nancy Richardson is alleged to have aided and abetted Microtune, Inc.'s violation of Rule 14a-9 of the Exchange Act.

Resolutions

First Resolution Date 01-Jul-2008

Related Documents:

comp20633 30-Jun-2008 Complaint
Complaint
The SEC stated: "From at least August 4, 2000, the effective date of Microtune's initial public offering, through mid 2003, Microtune, Inc., Douglas J. Bartek (Microtune's former Chief Executive Officer), Nancy A. Richardson (Microtune's former Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel) caused Microtune, Inc. to engage in a fraudulent stock-option backdating scheme. The backdating scheme was designed to provide executives and other employees with valuable "in-the-money" options without recording the required compensation expense in Microtune's books and records and financial statements."
LR-20633 01-Jul-2008 Litigation Release
SEC Settles With Microtune Inc. and Sues Former Microtune Offi cers In Stock Option Backdating Scheme
On July 1, 2008, the SEC stated that: "[It] filed civil fraud charges against Plano, Texas-based Microtune, Inc. and two former senior officers􀀀"former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Douglas J. Bartek and former Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel Nancy Richardson. The SEC alleges that Bartek and Richardson perpetrated a fraudulent and deceptive stock option backdating scheme that awarded themselves and other employees millions of dollars in undisclosed compensation. The backdating scheme caused the Plano, Texas-based company to file materially false and misleading financial statements with the Commission."
court_doc6_08-cv-01105 03-Jul-2008 Court Docket Document
Final Judgment as to Defendant Microtune, Inc.
The Court stated: "The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) having filed a Complaint and Defendant Microtune, Inc. (“Defendant”) having entered a general appearance; consented to the Court’s jurisdiction over Defendant and the subject matter of this action; consented to entry of this Final Judgment without admitting or denying the allegations of the Complaint (except as to jurisdiction); waived findings of fact and conclusions of law; and waived any right to appeal from this Final Judgment."

Other Defendants in Action:

Douglas Bartek
Nancy Richardson