Business Wire news release
BW1184 JAN 14,1997 6:26 PACIFIC 09:26 EASTERN
( BW)(ADVANCED-GRAVIS) Advanced Gravis Shareholders vigorously
pursuing class action and private criminal lawsuit(s) against
tobacco and liquor conglomerate American Brands et al for
Conspiracy, Rule 10b-5 violations
Business Editors/Legal Writers
REDMOND, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--January 14, 1997--SILICON
INVESTOR (Internet)--In response to American Brands' (AMB) alleged
false and fraudulent Notice of January 14, 1997 Extraordinary Meeting
and Information Circular Gravis Dissident shareholders are again
seeking injunctive relief to block a Final Order in the Supreme Court
of British Columbia to approve said alleged fraudulent Arrangement to
take Gravis private at an allegedly fraudulently arrived at US
$.33/share or less than $US 6 million for a $40+ million company in
sales, worldwide shelf space and owners of the critically acclaimed
Gravis GrIP and GamePad Pro multiplayer and EA Sports (ERTS) PC
gaming input device standards. The GrIP has been awarded the No. 1
PC gaming device for 1996 by Computer Gaming World, beating out rival
Microsoft Sidewinder, and is being hailed industry-wide as capable of
changing the face of PC gaming.
The dissident shareholders reallege the issues of facts of
Director criminal gross negligence pursuant to their news releases
issued on August 23 and 27, 1996, Sept 6 and a fourth issued on
Sept 13, 1996 one week prior to the (AMB) tender expiration, from
the Gravis Internet shareholder site on the Silicon Investor at
techstocks.com
The dissident shareholders prevailed in blocking said tender and
AMB waived their tender offer rights pursuant to their failed tender
offer on September 20, 1996, and further allege that the issues of
facts surrounding the alleged fraudulently McCarthy Tetrault staged
Gravis Annual General Meeting is further sole and proximate cause of
the irreparable injury and unspecified damages suffered by the
shareholders.
A spokesperson representing the Gravis shareholder group stated
that there is sufficient cause to obtain injunctive relief pursuant |
