December 13, 2010 - The court approved the settlement, entered the orders approving the plan of allocation, the motion for attorneys’ fees and expenses, and dismissed the action with prejudice.
August 16, 2010 - The court preliminarily approved the settlement.

July 29, 2010 - Parties filed a stipulation of settlement.

October 23, 2007 - The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motions to dismiss and granted lead plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint.

September 5, 2007 - The defendants filed motions to dismiss.

August 9, 2007 - The lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint.

September 29, 2006 - The defendants filed motions to dismiss.

July 31, 2006 - The lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint.

May 16, 2006 - The lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed and all cases were consolidated.

April 17, 2006 - Lead plaintiff motions were filed.

February 15, 2006 - An investor in shares of Cooper Companies Inc (NYSE: COO) filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Cooper Companies Inc over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between July 29, 2004 to November 21, 2005.

The complaint alleges that Cooper Companies Inc failed to disclose that: (i) Cooper Companies Inc improperly accounted for assets acquired in the Ocular merger by misclassifying intangible assets as tangible, which had the effect of lowering amortization expense; (ii) Cooper Companies Inc's aggressive earnings guidance reflected the improper accounting for intangible assets and was inflated by the amount of the understated amortization expense; (iii) the merger synergies touted by defendants were unrealistic; (iv) Ocular had stuffed the channel with its Biomedics products; (v) Cooper Companies Inc's lack of a two-week silicone hydrogel product would prevent it from meeting its aggressive growth targets for 2005 and beyond, contrary to defendants' repeated representations that Cooper Companies Inc's Proclear product was competing favorably against the silicone hydrogel products; and (vi) Cooper and Ocular in fact competed in the two-week lens market. The complaint further alleges that when the truth emerged on November 21, 2005, and November 22, 2005, Cooper Companies Inc stock (NYSE: COO) fell $21 per share, or 29%, to close at $51.47 per share on November 22, 2005. Between July 29, 2004 to November 21, 2005, insiders sold 1,970,233 shares of common stock for proceeds of $141,492,613.