April 24, 2015 - The court preliminarily approved the settlement.

February 15, 2015 - A stipulation of settlement was filed by the parties.

December 10, 2013 - A notice of appeal was filed.

March 31, 2011 - The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss.

February 22, 2010 - The court granted in part and denied in part the lead plaintiff's motion for reconsideration.

June 15, 2009 - A motion to dismiss the second amended complaint was filed.

April 30, 2009 - A second amended complaint was filed.

March 31, 2009 - The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motios to dismiss.

January 22, 2008 - A motion to dismiss the amended complaint was filed.

November 23, 2007 - An amended complaint was filed.

November 2, 2006 - An investor in shares of Apollo Group Inc (NASDAQ: APOL) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona against Apollo Group Inc over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between November 28, 2001 and October 18, 2006.

The complaint alleges that between November 28, 2001 and October 18, 2006, defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making materially false and misleading statements to artificially inflate the value of Apollo Group Inc stock (NASDAQ: APOL).

Specifically, it is alleged that between November 28, 2001 and October 18, 2006, the defendants represented to investors that it issued stock options to management in accordance with all applicable laws and rules while, in fact, it backdated options granted to all levels of management.

On June 9, 2006, in the midst of a nation-wide options scandal in connection with the backdating of options, Apollo Group Inc announced that it had performed a review of its stock option practices during fiscal 2000-2004 and initially concluded that it had complied with all applicable laws, and it would hire an outside firm to review those conclusions. Apollo Group Inc flatly denied that it had backdated options. These statements were false and misleading when made because the defendants failed to disclose or indicate that they knew that the option grant process was deficient and could cause Apollo Group Inc to restate its financial statements. Apollo Group Inc shocked the investing public when, on October 18, 2006, it disclosed that on June 23, 2006 Apollo Group Inc's Board of Directors appointed a special committee of two independent Board members to oversee the investigation of Apollo Group Inc's stock option grant practices.

Further, it was disclosed that the independent outside counsel retained by the special committee had themselves engaged independent accounting advisors to assist in the investigation. In addition, the Company for the first time disclosed that various deficiencies in the process of granting and documenting stock options have been identified to date.

Finally, and most unfortunately for Apollo Group Inc shareholders, the company disclosed for the first time that [t]he accounting impact of these matters has not been quantified. There can be no assurance that the results of the investigation will not require a possible restatement of Apollo Group Inc's financial statements when the potential errors are quantified and assessed. The market reacted quickly to these announcements. Apollo Group Inc (NASDAQ: APOL) stock price plummeted to $37.55 per share from its prior day close of $48.68 per share, a 22.86% drop in one day, on massive volume of 28,738,800 shares, more than fifteen times more than the prior day's volume.