December 31, 2010 - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a mandate ordering that the appeal is dismissed.
July 19, 2010 - The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal.

July 7, 2010 - The court issued a judgment dismissing all claims with prejudice.

June 10, 2010 - The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss

May 20, 2010 - Another lead plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice.

March 25, 2010 - A lead plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice.

August 28, 2009 - The defendants' filed a motion to dismiss.

July 29, 2009 - A plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice and a new lead plaintiff was substituted and appointed.

May 8, 2009 - The lead plaintiff filed an amended consolidated complaint.

March 30, 2009 - The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss with granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint.

January 9, 2009 - An individual defendant filed a motion to dismiss.

November 25, 2008 - The defendants filed a motion to dismiss.

September 5, 2008 - The lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint.

July 16, 2008 - The lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed and an additional case was consolidated.

June 9, 2008 - An additional lead plaintiff motion was filed.

June 9, 2008 - Another investor filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of investors who purchased UBS AG (NYSE: UBS) auction rate securities between June 9, 2003 and February 13, 2008.

May 20, 2008 - Lead plaintiff motions were filed.

May 16, 2008 - All cases were consolidated.

May 8, 2008 - Another investor filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of investors who purchased UBS AG (NYSE: UBS) auction rate securities between May 8, 2003 and February 13, 2008.

March 26, 2008 - Another investor filed a complaint.

March 21, 2008 - An investor in auction rate securities from UBS AG (NYSE: UBS) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against UBS AG over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws between March 21, 2003 and February 13, 2008.

The Complaint alleges that UBS AG failed to disclose the following material facts about the auction rate securities it sold to the class: (1) the auction rate securities were not cash alternatives, like money market funds, but were instead, complex, long-term financial instruments with 30 year maturity dates, or longer; (2) the auction rate securities were only liquid at the time of sale because UBS AG and other broker-dealers were artificially supporting and manipulating the auction rate market to maintain the appearance of liquidity and stability; (3) UBS AG and other broker-dealers routinely intervened in auctions for their own benefit, to set rates and prevent all-hold auctions and failed auctions; and (4) UBS AG continued to market auction rate securities as liquid investments after it had determined that it and other broker dealers were likely to withdraw their support for the periodic auctions and that a freeze of the market for auction rate securities would result.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that UBS AG violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by deceiving investors about the investment characteristics of auction rate securities and the auction market in which these securities traded. Auction rate securities are either municipal or corporate debt securities or preferred stocks which pay interest at rates set at periodic auctions. Auction rate securities generally have long-term maturities or no maturity dates.