We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type |
---|---|---|---|
Cardiac Science Corp (MM) | NASDAQ:CSCX | NASDAQ | Common Stock |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 2.32 | 0 | 00:00:00 |
Transaction Valuation* | Amount of Filing Fee** | ||||
$64,523,593
|
$4,600.54 | ||||
* | For purposes of calculating the filing fee pursuant to Rule 0-11(d) only, the Transaction Valuation was calculated on the basis of (i) the aggregate of 28,053,736 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share, of Cardiac Science Corporation (Shares), which is the estimated maximum number of Shares that may be acquired in this tender offer (consisting of (a) 23,867,815 Shares issued and outstanding, (b) 4,185,921 Shares authorized and reserved for issuance (including outstanding options to purchase 2,755,968 Shares, outstanding restricted stock units with respect to 1,421,609 Shares and outstanding warrants to purchase 8,344 Shares)), and (ii) the tender offer price of $2.30 per Share. | |
** | The filing fee, calculated in accordance with Rule 0-11 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Fee Rate Advisory #4 for fiscal year 2010, issued December 17, 2009, is calculated by multiplying the Transaction Valuation by 0.00007130. |
þ | Check the box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing with which the offsetting fee was previously paid. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing. |
Amount Previously Paid: $4,600.54
|
Filing Party: Opto Circuits
(India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition
Company
|
|
Form or Registration No.: Schedule TO-T
|
Date Filed: November 1, 2010 |
o | Check the box if the filing relates solely to preliminary communications made before the commencement of a tender offer. |
þ | third-party tender offer subject to Rule 14d-1. | ||
o | issuer tender offer subject to Rule 13e-4. | ||
o | going-private transaction subject to Rule 13e-3. | ||
o | amendment to Schedule 13D under Rule 13d-2. |
| The Offer is not subject to any financing condition. Opto Circuits plans to fund the purchase of Shares in the Offer with its available cash and available credit facilities. |
| The execution of final customary documentation. | ||
| There not having been any event, occurrence, development or state of circumstances or facts that has had or would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Purchaser or DBS. | ||
| Provision of various financial and acquisition documents. | ||
| Provision of certain corporate governance documents of each obligor. | ||
| Provision of various legal opinions. |
| The Credit Facility will be used for the specified purposes; | ||
| Opto Circuits submitting relevant documents relating to the Credit Facility as specified by Standard Chartered from time to time; | ||
| Opto Circuits complying with conditions precedent customary in similar transactions, including delivery of resolutions of the board of directors authorizing use of the Credit Facility, delivery of various corporate governance documents, delivery of a demand promissory note undertaking to repay the entire amount of the Credit Facility, and other requirements as required from time to time by Standard Chartered; | ||
| Opto Circuits complying with Reserve Bank of India guidelines; | ||
| Opto Circuits providing current assets as security in favor of Standard Chartered and agreeing to insure the property offered as security; | ||
| Opto Circuits being the sole legal and beneficial owner of all its fixed and current assets and none of such assets shall be sold without the prior consent of Standard Chartered; | ||
| A periodic review based on Opto Circuits financial statements; and | ||
| General covenants and representations and warranties, including but not limited to details regarding incorporation of Opto Circuits, its constitutional documents, and changes in ownership. |
| On October 20, 2010, a shareholder class action complaint was filed in Snohomish County Superior Court. The complaint, captioned Creamer v. Cardiac Science Corporation, et al. , names as defendants the members of the Cardiac Science board, as well as Cardiac Science, one of its executive officers, Opto Circuits, and Purchaser (the Creamer Action ). The plaintiffs allege that the Cardiac Science directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science stockholders, and further claim that Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits and Purchaser aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint alleges that the proposed transaction between Cardiac Science and Opto Circuits involves an unfair price, an inadequate sales process and unreasonable deal protection devices and that defendants agreed to the Merger to benefit themselves personally. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin the transaction, and to impose a constructive trust in favor of plaintiffs and the purported class upon any benefits improperly received by defendants. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys and other fees and costs, in addition to seeking other relief. The foregoing summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Creamer Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. | ||
| On October 22, 2010, a shareholder class action complaint was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The complaint, captioned Patenaude v. Cardiac Science Corporation, et al. , names as defendants the members of the Cardiac Science board, as well as Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits, and Purchaser (the Patenaude Action ). The plaintiffs allege that the Cardiac Science directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science stockholders, and further claim that Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits and Purchaser aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint alleges that the proposed transaction between Cardiac Science and Opto Circuits involves an unfair price, an inadequate sales process and unreasonable deal protection devices and that defendants agreed to the Merger to benefit themselves personally. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin the transaction, and, in the event the transaction is consummated, to rescind the transaction. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys and other fees and costs, in addition to seeking other relief. The foregoing summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Patenaude Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. |
| On October 22, 2010, a shareholder class action complaint was filed in Snohomish County Superior Court. The complaint, captioned Gluck v. Naumann-Etienne, et al. , names as defendants the members of the Cardiac Science board, as well as Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits, and Purchaser (the Gluck Action ). The plaintiffs allege that the Cardiac Science directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science stockholders, and further claim that Opto Circuits and Purchaser aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaints allege that the proposed transaction between Cardiac Science and Opto Circuits involves an unfair price, an inadequate sales process and unreasonable deal protection devices. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin the transaction, and, in the event the transaction is consummated, to rescind the transaction. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys and other fees and costs, in addition to seeking other relief. The foregoing summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Gluck Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. | ||
| On October 26, 2010, a shareholder class action complaint was filed in Snohomish County Superior Court. The complaint, captioned Rapport v. Marver, et al. , names as defendants the members of the Cardiac Science board, as well as Cardiac Science (the Rapport Action ). The plaintiffs allege that the Cardiac Science directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science stockholders, and further claim that Cardiac Science aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint alleges that the proposed transaction between Cardiac Science and Opto Circuits involves an unfair price, an inadequate sales process and unreasonable deal protection devices. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin the transaction, and, in the event the transaction is consummated, to rescind the transaction. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys and other fees and costs, in addition to seeking other relief. The foregoing summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Rapport Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. | ||
| On October 27, 2010, a shareholder class action complaint was filed in Snohomish County Superior Court. The complaint, captioned Bagge v. Naumann-Etienne, et al. , names as defendants the members of the Cardiac Science board, former Cardiac Science Board member Christopher Davis, as well as Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits and Purchaser (the Bagge Action ). The plaintiffs allege that the Cardiac Science directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science stockholders, and further claim that Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits and Purchaser aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint alleges that the proposed transaction between Cardiac Science and Opto Circuits involves an unfair price, an inadequate sales process and unreasonable deal protection devices. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin the transaction. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys and other fees and costs, in addition to seeking other relief. The foregoing summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Bagge Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. | ||
| On November 10, 2010, a shareholder class action complaint was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The complaint, captioned Kühni v. Cardiac Science Corporation, et al. , names as defendants the members of the Cardiac Science board, as well as Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits, and Purchaser (the Kühni Action ). The plaintiffs allege that the Cardiac Science directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science stockholders and further claim that Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits and Purchaser aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint alleges that the proposed transaction between Cardiac |
Science and Opto Circuits involves an unfair price, an inadequate sales process and unreasonable deal protection devices and that defendants agreed to the Merger to benefit themselves personally. The complaint alleges that the Form 14D-9 filed by Cardiac Science on November 1, 2010 fails to disclose to Cardiac Science shareholders material information necessary for them to determine whether to tender into the Tender Offer or to seek appraisal. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin the transaction, and, in the event the transaction is consummated, to rescind the transaction. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys and other fees and costs, in addition to seeking other relief. The foregoing summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Kühni Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. |
| On November 10, 2010, a shareholder class action complaint was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The complaint, captioned Suan Investments, Inc. v. Cardiac Science Corporation, et al. , names as defendants the members of the Cardiac Science board, as well as Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits, and Purchaser (the Suan Action ). The plaintiffs allege that the Cardiac Science directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science stockholders, and further claim that Cardiac Science, Opto Circuits and Purchaser aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint alleges that the proposed transaction between Cardiac Science and Opto Circuits involves an unfair price, an inadequate sales process and unreasonable deal protection devices and that defendants agreed to the Merger to benefit themselves personally. The complaint alleges that the Form 14D-9 filed by Cardiac Science on November 1, 2010 fails to disclose to Cardiac Science shareholders material information necessary for them to determine whether to tender into the Tender Offer or to seek appraisal. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin the transaction. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys and other fees and costs, in addition to seeking other relief. The foregoing summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Suan Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. |
| On November 3, 2010, plaintiffs in the four putative shareholder class actions pending in Snohomish County, Washington filed an Unopposed Motion for (1) Consolidation of Related Cases and Appointment of Counsel for the Proposed Class and (2) Approval of Plaintiffs Proposed Leadership Structure ( Consolidation Motion ). The Snohomish County Superior Court granted the Consolidation Motion on November 4, 2010 and consolidated the Creamer Action, the Gluck Action, the Rapport Action and the Bagge Action into one action under the caption In re Cardiac Science Corp. Shareholder Litigation (the Consolidated Washington Action ). The plaintiffs in the Consolidated Washington Action did not file a consolidated complaint. | ||
| On November 5, 2010, plaintiffs in the Consolidated Washington Action filed Plaintiffs Motion and Memorandum of Law for Limited Expedited Discovery. | ||
| On November 5, 2010, plaintiff in the Patenaude Action served a Subpoena ad Testificandum and Duces Tecum on Piper Jaffray & Co., the financial advisor to the Cardiac Science board of directors related to the proposed merger with Opto Circuits. | ||
| On November 7, 2010, plaintiff in the Patenaude Action served his First Request for the Production of Documents and Things to All Defendants. |
| On November 7, 2010, plaintiff in the Patenaude Action filed an amended complaint (the Amended Patenaude Action ) in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The amended complaint named the same defendants as named in the original complaint but added allegations that the Cardiac Science directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Cardiac Science shareholders by providing materially misleading and incomplete information about the Tender Offer to Cardiac Science shareholders. The foregoing summary of the Amended Patenaude Action is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Amended Patenaude Action, which is filed as an exhibit to the Schedule TO that has been filed with the Commission and is incorporated herein by reference. | ||
| On November 8, 2010, plaintiff in the Patenaude Action scheduled his motion for preliminary injunction to be heard by the Delaware Court of Chancery on November 22, 2010. | ||
| On November 9, 2010, Cardiac Science and the Cardiac Science directors and officers filed the Cardiac Science Defendants Motion to Dismiss or, In the Alternative, Stay Litigation in the Consolidated Washington Action. | ||
| On November 10, 2010, the parties to the Patenaude Action and the Kühni Action reached agreement on a schedule for expedited discovery and expedited briefing on plaintiff Patenaudes motion for preliminary injunction, based on the November 22, 2010 hearing date for the preliminary injunction motion. Also on November 10, 2010, the parties to the Patenaude Action and the Kühni Action reached agreement on the terms of a Stipulation and Proposed Order Governing the Production and Exchange of Confidential and Highly Confidential Information (the Confidentiality Order ). Cardiac Science and Opto Circuits thereupon commenced production of documents to the plaintiffs in these two actions subject to the terms of the Confidentiality Order and in accord with the agreed schedule for expedited discovery. | ||
| On November 11, 2010, the parties to the Patenaude Action and the Kühni Action filed the Confidentiality Order. | ||
| On November 11, 2010, plaintiffs in the Consolidated Washington Action agreed to stay the Consolidated Washington Action in favor of participating in the litigation and expedited discovery in the Patenaude Action and the Kühni Action. | ||
| On November 12, 2010, in light of the agreement to stay the Consolidated Washington Action, plaintiffs in the Consolidated Washington Action struck their Motion for Limited Expedited Discovery and Cardiac Science and the Cardiac Science directors and officers struck their Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Stay Litigation. | ||
| On November 15, 2010, the parties to the Consolidated Washington Action filed and the Court entered a Stipulation and Agreed Order Regarding Stay of Action, pursuant to which the Consolidated Washington Action has been stayed in favor of the Washington plaintiffs participating in the litigation and expedited discovery in the Patenaude Action and the Kühni Action. | ||
| On November 15 and November 16, 2010, plaintiffs in the Patenaude Action, the Kühni Action and the Consolidated Washington Action took the depositions under oath of Cardiac Science President and Chief Executive Officer David L. Marver and a representative of Piper Jaffray & Co. |
(a)(1)(B)
|
Amended Letter of Transmittal (including Guidelines for Certification of Taxpayer Identification Number on Substitute Form W-9) | |
|
||
(a)(5)(B)(i)
|
Verified Amended Class Action Complaint captioned Lionel Patenaude v. Cardiac Science Corporation, Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 5923-VCP, filed on November 7, 2010 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware | |
|
||
(a)(5)(E)
|
Complaint captioned Stephen Bagge vs. Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Christopher J. Davis, Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits Limited and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 102090451, filed on October 27, 2010 in the Superior Court of Washington, Snohomish County | |
|
||
(a)(5)(F)
|
Complaint captioned Daniel Kühni v. Cardiac Science Corporation, Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Opto Circuits (India) Limited and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 5972-, filed on November 10, 2010 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware | |
|
||
(a)(5)(G)
|
Complaint captioned Suan Investments, Inc. v. Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, David L. Marver, W. Robert Berg, Timothy C. Mickelson, Ronald A. Andrews, Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 5971-, filed on November 10, 2010 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware | |
|
||
(a)(5)(H)
|
Memorandum of Understanding, dated as of November 18, 2010, related to putative |
|
class action lawsuits other than the Suan Investments Action (as defined therein) | |
|
||
(b)(1)
|
Facility Agreement, made as of August 18, 2010, between Opto Circuits (India) Limited and Standard Chartered Bank | |
|
||
(b)(2)
|
Letter, dated November 11, 2010, between Opto Circuits (India) Limited and Standard Chartered Bank regarding credit facilities | |
|
||
(b)(3)
|
Facility Agreement, dated November 19, 2010, between Jolt Acquisition Company, Opto Circuits (India) Limited, DBS Bank Ltd, Bangalore Branch, The Financial Institutions listed therein, DBS Bank Ltd, Singapore and the Security Trustee | |
|
||
(d)(2)(A)
|
Amendment No. 2, dated November 19, 2010, to the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of October 19, 2010, as amended, by and among Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company |
Opto Circuits (India) Ltd.
|
||||
By: | /s/ Vinod Ramnani | |||
Name: | Vinod Ramnani | |||
Title: | Chairman & Managing Director | |||
Jolt Acquisition Company
|
||||
By: | /s/ Anshul Vaswaney | |||
Name: | Anshul Vaswaney | |||
Title: | President | |||
(a)(1)(A)
|
Offer to Purchase dated November 1, 2010* | |
|
||
(a)(1)(B)
|
Amended Letter of Transmittal (including Guidelines for Certification of Taxpayer Identification Number on Substitute Form W-9) | |
|
||
(a)(1)(C)
|
Form of Notice of Guaranteed Delivery* | |
|
||
(a)(1)(D)
|
Form of Letter to Brokers, Dealers, Commercial Banks, Trusts Companies and Other Nominees* | |
|
||
(a)(1)(E)
|
Form of Letter to Clients for Use by Brokers, Dealers, Commercial Banks, Trust Companies and Other Nominees* | |
|
||
(a)(1)(F)
|
Text of joint press release issued by Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Cardiac Science Corporation, dated October 19, 2010 (incorporated by reference to the Schedule TO-C filed by Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2010)* | |
|
||
(a)(1)(G)
|
Text of joint press release issued by Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Cardiac Science Corporation issued in India, dated October 19, 2010 (incorporated by reference to the Schedule TO-C filed by Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2010)* | |
|
||
(a)(1)(H)
|
Form of summary advertisement published in the New York Times on November 1, 2010* | |
|
||
(a)(5)(A)
|
Complaint captioned Mindy Creamer vs. Cardiac Science Corporation, David L. Marver, Michael K. Matysik, Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, W. Robert Berg, Timothy C. Mickelson, Ronald A. Andrews, Jr., Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 102087824, filed on October 20, 2010 in the Superior Court of Washington, Snohomish County* | |
|
||
(a)(5)(B)
|
Complaint captioned Lionel Patenaude v. Cardiac Science Corporation, Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 5923-, filed on October 22, 2010 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware* | |
|
||
(a)(5)(B)(i)
|
Verified Amended Class Action Complaint captioned Lionel Patenaude v. Cardiac Science Corporation, Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 5923-VCP, filed on November 7, 2010 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware | |
|
||
(a)(5)(C)
|
Complaint captioned Robert Gluck v. Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 102089126, filed on October 22, 2010 in the Superior Court of Washington, Snohomish County* | |
|
||
(a)(5)(D)
|
Complaint captioned Mark Rapport v. David Marver, Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, W. Robert Berg, Ronald Andrews, and Cardiac Science Corporation , Case No. 102090051, filed on October 26, 2010 in the Superior Court of Washington, Snohomish County* | |
|
||
(a)(5)(E)
|
Complaint captioned Stephen Bagge vs. Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Christopher J. Davis, Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits Limited and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 102090451, filed on October 27, 2010 in the Superior Court of Washington, Snohomish County | |
|
||
(a)(5)(F)
|
Complaint captioned Daniel Kühni v. Cardiac Science Corporation, Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, Ronald Andrews, W. Robert Berg, Dave Marver, Timothy C. Mickelson, Opto Circuits (India) Limited and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 5972-, filed on November 10, 2010 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware | |
|
||
(a)(5)(G)
|
Complaint captioned Suan Investments, Inc. v. Ruediger Naumann-Etienne, David L. Marver, W. Robert Berg, Timothy C. Mickelson, Ronald A. Andrews, Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company , Case No. 5971-, filed on November 10, 2010 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware | |
|
||
(a)(5)(H)
|
Memorandum of Understanding, dated as of November 18, 2010, related to putative |
|
class action lawsuits other than the Suan Investments Action (as defined therein) | |
|
||
(b)(1)
|
Facility Agreement, made as of August 18, 2010, between Opto Circuits (India) Limited and Standard Chartered Bank | |
|
||
(b)(2)
|
Letter, dated November 11, 2010, between Opto Circuits (India) Limited and Standard Chartered Bank regarding credit facilities | |
|
||
(b)(3)
|
Facility Agreement, dated November 19, 2010, between Jolt Acquisition Company, Opto Circuits (India) Limited, DBS Bank Ltd, Bangalore Branch, The Financial Institutions listed therein, DBS Bank Ltd, Singapore and the Security Trustee | |
|
||
(d)(1)
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated October 19, 2010, by and among Opto Circuits (India) Ltd., Jolt Acquisition Company and Cardiac Science Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 of the Current Report on Form 8-K filed by Cardiac Science Corporation with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2010)* | |
|
||
(d)(2)
|
Amendment No. 1, dated October 29, 2010, to the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of October 19, 2010, by and among Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 of the Current Report on Form 8-K filed by Cardiac Science Corporation with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 29, 2010)* | |
|
||
(d)(2)(A)
|
Amendment No. 2, dated November 19, 2010, to the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of October 19, 2010, as amended, by and among Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Jolt Acquisition Company | |
|
||
(d)(3)
|
Mutual Non-Disclosure Agreement, dated June 25, 2010, by and between Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and its subsidiary Criticare Systems Inc.* | |
|
||
(d)(4)
|
Addendum No. 1, dated July 26, 2010, to Mutual Non-Disclosure Agreement, dated June 25, 2010, by and between Cardiac Science Corporation, Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and its subsidiary Criticare Systems Inc.* | |
|
||
(d)(5)
|
Non-Binding Letter of Intent, dated August 10, 2010, between Opto Circuits (India) Ltd. and Cardiac Science Corporation* |
* | Previously filed. |
1 Year Cardiac Science Corp (MM) Chart |
1 Month Cardiac Science Corp (MM) Chart |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions