February 27, 2006 - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed the decision of the District Court.
March 24, 2005 - The lead plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal.

March 3, 2005 - The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss.

October 22, 2003 - The defendants filed a motion to dismiss.

September 9, 2003 - The lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on behalf of investors who purchased Owens Corning Inc (OTC: OWENQ) common shares between September 20, 1999 to October 4, 2000. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading statements between September 20, 1999 to October 4, 2000.

July 30, 2003 - Lead plaintiffs and lead counsel were appointed and all cases were consolidated.

April 1, 2003 - Lead plaintiff motions were filed.

January 27, 2003 - An investor in shares of Owens Corning Inc (OTC: OWENQ now trading on the NYSE sheets as OC) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio against Owens Corning Inc over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock or preferred stock of Owens Corning Inc (OTC: OWENQ) during the period from September 20, 1999 through October 5, 2000.

The complaint asserts claims for violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 against five Owens Corning Inc executives, including Owens Corning Inc's Chief Executive Officer, two Chief Financial Officers, and Comptroller, as well as one Owens Corning Inc director. Due to the automatic stay of proceedings afforded by Owens Corning Inc's bankruptcy filing, Owens Corning Inc is not named as a defendant in this action. The alleged violations, according to the complaint, stem from materially false and misleading statements made by the defendants during the period from September 20, 1999 through October 5, 2000 that, as detailed below: (i) materially misrepresented Owens Corning Inc's financial health and performance; thereby (ii) causing Owens Corning Inc stock to trade at artificially-inflated prices.

The complaint charges that defendants described Owens Corning Inc's financial viability in two different ways to different audiences at the same time. At the very same time that the defendants were publicly representing that Owens Corning Inc's National Settlement Program (the NSP ) - implemented by Owens Corning Inc in 1999 in order to extinguish Owens Corning Inc's asbestos liabilities - was effectively managing and extinguishing Owens Corning Inc's asbestos liabilities and that the NSP would leave Owens Corning Inc largely liability-free after 2001, the defendants told a very different - and more accurate - story to a small, select group of Owens Corning Inc investors who were positioned to control Owens Corning Inc in the event of a bankruptcy, so the lawsuit. To the latter group, according to the complaint, defendants revealed the truth - the NSP plan wasn't working, and would in fact capsize Owens Corning Inc unless NSP-mandated payments were drastically curtailed.

As the complaint charges, the share price of Owens Corning Inc stock was artificially inflated during the period from September 20, 1999 through October 5, 2000 by defendants' positive public statements, which materially misled the public as to Owens Corning Inc's true financial state and very financial viability. During late 1999 and early 2000, Owens Corning Inc stock - supported by defendants' statements - traded at between $15 and $25 per share. In mid- and late 2000, as defendants slowly began to reveal to the public a more accurate assessment of Owens Corning Inc and its asbestos liabilities, Owens Corning Inc's share price deflated. On October 5, 2000, Owens Corning Inc shares fell to $1 per share when Owens Corning Inc declared bankruptcy and admitted that it had been overwhelmed by the asbestos liabilities that defendants claimed publicly to have solved.