January 22, 2010 - The court denied the lead plaintiffs' motion for leave.
June 26, 2009 - The lead plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint.

May 20, 2009 - The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss. The lead plaintiff is granted to leave to file a motion to amend the complaint.

April 9, 2009 - The court in part granted and in part denied plaintiff's motion to reconsider.

December 15, 2008 - The lead plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration.

November 24, 2008 - The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss.

June 9, 2008 - Defendants filed a motion to dismiss.

May 27, 2008 - The court dismissed the claims against certain defendants without prejudice.

March 26, 2008 - The lead plaintiff filed an amended consolidated complaint.

February 25, 2008 - Lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed and all cases were consolidated.

January 14, 2008 - Lead plaintiff motion was filed.

November 9, 2007 - An investor in shares of Vodafone Group Plc (NASDAQ: VOD) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in connection with certainly alleged false and misleading statements made between June 10, 2004 and February 24, 2006.

The complaint charges Vodafone Group Plc and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Vodafone Group Plc is one of the world’s largest providers of mobile telephone services, with worldwide operations in 28 countries, including in the United States, Germany, Italy and Japan.

The complaint alleges that defendants’ statements regarding Vodafone Group Plc’s business and prospects issued during the Class Period were false and misleading in failing to disclose the following true facts: (a) throughout the Class Period, Vodafone Group Plc’s financial statements and reports were materially falsified and overstated, including the overstatement of its assets and operating earnings due to the over-valuation of its German, Italian and Japanese operations; (b) Vodafone Group Plc’s German operations had not been successfully integrated into Vodafone Group Plc’s overall operations and were suffering from significant operational problems, inefficiencies and a lack of growth and profitability adequate to permit Vodafone Group Plc to recover its investment in its German operations; (c) Vodafone Group Plc’s Japanese operations were materially overvalued on Vodafone Group Plc’s financial statements due to the failure to hold or gain sufficient market share so as to permit Vodafone Group Plc to recover its investment in its Japanese operations; (d) Vodafone Group Plc’s “One Vodafone” cost savings and operational efficiency initiative was not succeeding or achieving any significant cost savings; and (e) due to the foregoing adverse factors which were negatively impacting Vodafone Group Plc’s operations and financial performance, defendants knew that the levels of financial performance being forecast for Vodafone Group Plc for fiscal 2006 and 2007 would not and could not be achieved.