Red Hat, Inc. Securities Litigation 04-CV-473-Consolidated Amended
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR T FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Master File NO.5:04-CV-473 (1 ) FILED IN RE RED HAT, INC . ) MAY 6 2005 SECURITIES LITIGATION ) CLASS ACTION This Document Relates To: ) ALL ACTIONS ) CONSOLIDATED A MENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 6 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. NATURE OF THE ACTION . ..... ...... ...... ..... .. ....... ...... .. .. .. .. ..... ...... ...... ..... ..1 II . SUMMARY OF THE ACTION .. ...... ...... .. ...... .. .... .. ........ .. ..... .. .. ........ ..... .. ...... .....1 III . JURISDICTION AND VENUE ........ ....... ..... ........ ...... ......... .. ....... ........ ..... ......2 IV . THE PARTIES . .. .. .......... .. ..... ...... ...... ........ ...... .. ........ ....... ............ ................ ...... .. ..3 A. Lead Plaintiffs .. .. ...... ........ ........ ..... ........ ........ ....... .......... .. ....... .. ...... ..... ....3 B. Defendants ... ....... .. ........ ...... ........ ...... ...... ....... .. .. ........ ....... ...... ...... .....3 V. DEFENDANTS' FRAUDULENT SCHEME ..... ........ ....... ...................... ....... ....... ...... .6 A. Red Hat's Business Model Allowed Defendants to Conceal Their Fraud . ..... ...... .6 B. Defendants' Systematically Engaged in Prematurely Recognizing Revenue ...... .8 (1) Defendants knew most contracts were signed near the end of th e month ... .......... .. ...... ...... ........ ........ ..... ...... .. .. ............ ..... ...... .. .... ..... 9 C. Defendants' Desperation to Recognize Revenue Created a Culture o f Accounting Fraud .... ...... ..... ......... ....... ..... .. ........ .......... .. ....... ......... .. .... .....10 (1) Red Hat acquires companies just to recognize short term revenue .... .....10 (2) Defendants purposely inflated their subscriber contract renewals .... .....1 1 (3) Defendant Thompson couldn't handle the truth ..... ..... ........ ...... .... .15 (4) Defendants prematurely recognized revenue on consulting hours .... ...... .1 6 (5) The Barking Dog : Defendants created an aura of fear and intimidation.... ........ ................ ..... .. ........ ....... .. .............. ........ ....... .. .... ..1 7 (6) Defendants refuse to stop prematurely recognizing revenue eve n after being personally confronted by a high level insider ........ ....... ....... ...1 8 D. PWC actively participated in the scheme . ........ .......... ......... .. .......... ......... .... ...21 E. PWC audit staff were intertwined with Red Hat's CFO and Financ e Department.. .. .. ........ ...... .. .............. ..... ...... ....... .. .. ....... ...... .. ........ ..... .....22 F. Barber is going to be replaced ....... ...... ...... ...... .. ......... .. ...... .. ...... ..... .....24 G. The "firestorm" rapidly approaches . ...... ........ ....... ......... .. .. ........ ...... .... ......24 H. PWC and the Defendants Know they Are in Imminent Danger of Bein g Exposed... .. ........ ..... ...... .. ...... ...... ....... ......... .. ...... ............ .. ...... .. .... ..... .26 I. The Individual Defendants Dump Their Stock ..... ....... ............ ........ .. ... .. .... .. .26 J . The PWC Replacement Auditor Arrives at Red Hat .... .. .......... .. ...... .. ..... .. .... ..27 VI. THE TRUTH REGARDING RED HAT'S REVENUE RECOGNITION SCHEME IS PARTIALLY REVEALED ..... ...... ...... ....... .. .......... ........ ..... ..... ...28 A. Monday, June 14, 2004 -- The CFO Bails Out . ...... .. .......... ...... ..... ..... ...28 B. Tuesday, June 15, 2004 - Defendants' Continue to Panic ........ .. ...... ..... ..... ...29 C. Wednesday, June 16, 2004 -- The New Auditor "Drops the Bomb" . ....... ...... .....30 D. Thursday, June 17, 2004 - Defendants' Announce Earnings Shortfall ..... ...... .....30 E. Barber's Tries to Cover His Tracks . ....... ...... .. ..... .. .......... .. ......... .. ..... .. ...... ......32 VII. THE TRUTH REGARDING RED HAT'S REVENUE RECOGNITIO N SCHEME IS FINALLY FULLY REVEALED .... ..... ....... .. .. .......... .. ..... ...... ...... ..33 A. End Of Class Period: Defendants Announce Restatement And SEC Inquiry ....... .. ...... ........ ..... ........ ........ ...... ...... ........ .. ....... .. ........ ....... .... 3 3 VIII. DEFENDANTS' FALSE AND MISLEADING STATEMENTS . .. .. ..... ........ .. ...... ..... .38 A. The Class Period Begins: Defendants Issue False Financial Results For 3Q03 (ended November 30, 2002) ...... ..... ........ ........ .......... .. ...... ...... ..... .38 B. Reasons for Falsity: 3Q03 . ...... .......... .... .. .. ...... ...... .. .. .......... ... ..... C. Defendants Release False Fiscal Year 2003 Year End Financial Results .. ...... ..43 D. Reasons for Falsity: Fiscal Year 2003 (Ended February 28, 2003) . .. ........ ..... ....46 E. The Fraud Continues: First Quarter Fiscal Year 2004 (Ended May 31 , 2003) ........ .. ........ ..... ...... ...... .. ..... ..... .. .... .. ....... .. ....... ...... ..... ....47 F. Reasons for Falsity: 1 Q04.... ...... .. ..... ...... ........ ........ ........... ....... ..... .. ....49 G. The Fraud Continues: Defendants Issue False 3Q04 Results ......... ........ ...... ..... .50 H. Reasons for Falsity: 3Q04.. ....... .. ...... ........ ...... .. ........ ............ .......... ...... ......53 1. Defendants Issue False 4Q04 and Fiscal Year 2004 Results ........ ........ ....... .. .... .53 J. Reasons for Falsity: 4Q and FY 2004 . ...... ... ........ ...... .................... ...... ...... ..58 K. Red Hat's June 17, 2004 False Statements .. ......... .. ..... .......... ........ .. ..... .. ....... ..59 (1) False statements regarding revenue recognition . ......... ........ ..... ...... ..59 (2) Defendant Szulik lies about the restatement and SEC investigation ..... ..61 L. Reasons for Falsity of the June 17, 2004 Statements ... ........ .. ........ ..... ...... ....62 IX. DEFENDANT'S OMISSIONS AND FAILURE TO REVEAL THE TRUTH ... ...... ....63 X. DEFENDANTS' FALSE FINANCIAL REPORTING . ..... .. ........ .. .. ....... .. ..... .. ...... .....63 A. Defendants Violated GAAP.. ...... ... ...... ....... ..... ........ .......... .. ..... .. ..... .... .63 B. Red Hat's Financial Restatement . .. ...... .. ...... .. ..... ........ .......... .. ..... ....... ..... .70 C. Defendants' Additional GAAP Violations .... .. ..... ........ .......... ........ ...... ...... .73 XI. PWC'S AUDITING VIOLATIONS .. ..... .. ...... ........ .. ...... .. ...... ........ .. ....... .. ...... ..... .74 A. PWC and Barber's Violations of GAAS ....... .. ....... .. ...... .. ........ .. ....... .. ...... ..... .79 B. PWC Violated Section I OA(b)(1) of the Exchange Act ... ........ .. ..... .. ...... ...... .85 C. PWC Violated Its Own Accounting Guidelines .... .. ........ .......... .. ..... .. ....... ...... .86 D. PWC and Barber Engaged in Improper Professional Conduct Within the Meaning of Commission Rule of Practice 102(e).. .. ........ .......... ..... ....... ...... .86 E. PWC's Lack of Independence ... ........ .. ....... ....... ........ .. ......... ..... ...... ...... .88 XII. DEFENDANTS REAPED ENORMOUS FINANCIAL BENEFITS THROUG H THEIR FRAUDULENT SCHEME . ..... ........ ...... .. .... .. .. ........ .......... ....... ...... ...... .90 A. Defendants Acted With Scienter........ ...... ....... ........ .. ........ .. ....... ...... ..... .90 B. Defendants' Insider Selling Was Unusual In Timing And Amount ... ...... ..... .92 C. The Defendants' Compensation, Bonuses, and Other Incentives were Highly Dependent on Meeting Red Hat's Aggressive Financial Objective s and Estimates . .. ...... .. .. .......... ........ ...... ..... .. .. ....... ...... ... ..... .. ...... ..... .96 (1) Defendant Szulik.... ..... ........ .. ...... ..... .. ...... .. ....... .. ........ ...... ..... ..97 ii (2) Defendant Thompson ...... ....... ..... .. ....... ........ ..... ...... ...... .....98 (3) Defendant Buckley.. ...... .. ...... .. ..... ....... ........ .. .. ..... .. .. ...... ....... ....99 (4) Defendant Webbink . ..... .. .. ...... ....... ...... ...... .. ......... ...... .. ....... .....99 (5) Defendant Cormier.. .. ...... .. .. ...... ........ ........ ....... .. ....... ....... ...... ... 100 D. Defendants Were Motivated To Inflate Red Hat Stock In Order To Complete Stock-Based Acquisitions During The Class Period.... ........ ........ ... 100 E. Defendants Propped Up the Company's Stock Price In Order to Complete a Sale of $600 Million in Convertible Senior Debentures . .... ...... .. ........ ........ ... 101 F. Defendant's Had Access to an Enormous Amount of Detailed Financial Information at Their Fingertips ....... ........ .. ....... .. ......... .. ...... ...... .. ...... .. ...... ... 101 (1) Red Hat utilized accounting software . .......... .......... .. .. ..... ........ ...... ... 101 (2) Regular internal reports were given directly to management ...... ....... ... 102 (3) The Finance Department held regular meetings ..... ...... ... ........ ........ .. 102 G. The Individual Defendants Controlled All Aspects of Red Hat ... ......... ........ ... 102 (1) Defendant Szulik. .... ....... ........ ....... .. ........ ...... ..... ........ ....... ... 103 (2) Defendant Thompson .. ....... ........ .. ........ ........ .. ........ ..... ........ ....... 103 (3) Defendant Webbink .. ........ ....... ...... ........ .. ........ ...... ...... ...... ... 104 (4) Defendant Buckley. ... ........ ...... ..... ........ ........ ....... ........ ...... .. .104 (5) Defendant Cormier. ..... .. ...... ........ .. ..... .. .....