4 unchanged sentences
(“Well Thrive”) filed a complaint against SemiLEDs Corporation in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
−Removed: The complaint alleges that Well Thrive was entitled to return of $500 thousand paid toward a note purchase pursuant to a purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) effective July 6, 2016 with Dr.
+Added: The complaint alleged that Well Thrive was entitled to return of $500 thousand paid toward a note purchase pursuant to a purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) effective July 6, 2016 with Dr.
Peter Chiou, which was assigned to Well Thrive on August 4, 2016.
3 unchanged sentences
On March 27, 2018, Well Thrive filed an answering brief in opposition to our motion on the basis that Well Thrive never consented to dismiss the case.
+Added: On January 2, 2019, the judge denied without prejudice the motion filed by us, because there remains some question as to whether Well Thrive’s former lawyers and Dr.
+Added: Chiou had authority from Well Thrive to settle this case.
The judge’s order allowed us to conduct depositions of Well Thrive’s former lawyer, Dr.
2 unchanged sentences
Based on this order, we arranged the depositions to obtain more evidence in support of a motion to enforce the settlement agreement.
−Removed: On October 25, 2019, Well Thrive filed a motion to modify the Court’s scheduling order and to allow it to file a motion for summary judgment, and we filed an opposition to the motion.
−Removed: On November 13, 2019, the Court denied Well Thrive’s motion.
The Court held a trial on March 2, 2020.
−Removed: After the trial, judge ordered both sides to prepare post-trial briefs and proposed findings of fact for the Court to be submitted before end of April, 2020.
−Removed: On April 30, 2020, both sides submitted post-trail briefs and proposed findings of fact, and as of today, the judge has not rendered a verdict on this case.
−Removed: On March 11, 2019, a former employee (the “Plaintiff”) of Taiwan Bandaoti Zhaoming Co., Ltd.
−Removed: (“Taiwan Bandaoti”) filed a civil complaint against Taiwan Bandaoti in the Taiwan Miao-Li District Court.
−Removed: The Plaintiff alleged the following causes of action under the Labor Standards Act of Taiwan:
−Removed: (1) failure to pay the annual bonus;
−Removed: and (2) failure to pay transportation allowance.
−Removed: The Plaintiff is seeking compensation in the aggregate of approximately $9 thousand (NT$293 thousand).
−Removed: On May 24, 2019, Taiwan Miao-Li District Court determined on its own initiative to transfer the case to the Taiwan Hsin-Chu District Court due to a lack of jurisdiction over the action in whole or in part.
−Removed: On February 10, 2020, the Taiwan Hsin-Chu District Court made a determination in favor of the Company.
−Removed: As of the date filing this report, the term of appeal expired and the determination is affirmed.
−Removed: Except as described above, there was no material pending legal proceedings or claims as of May 31, 2020.
+Added: After the trial, the judge ordered both sides to prepare post-trial briefs and proposed findings of fact for the Court to be submitted before end of April 2020.
+Added: Both sides submitted post-trial briefs and proposed findings of fact on April 30, 2020.
+Added: On December 21, 2020, the judge, following a hearing, issued her judgment, which orders SemiLEDs to return the $500,000 to Well Thrive, and required both parties, on or before January 6, 2021, to submit information on the appropriate amount of interest to be added.
+Added: On January 6, 2021, the Company filed a brief arguing that there should not be an award of prejudgment interest and Well Thrive is arguing for the amount of $135,774 in pre-judgment interest.
+Added: Except as described above, there was no material pending legal proceedings or claims as of November 30, 2020.
+Added: There are no material changes related to risk factors from the risk factors described in Item 1A “Risk Factors” in Part I of our 2020 Annual Report.
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.