On August 17, 2020, Analog Devices, Inc. (“ADI”) filed a registration
statement on Form S-4
(File No. 333-248092)
(as amended, the “Form S-4”) with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) in connection with ADI’s
proposed acquisition of Maxim Integrated Products, Inc.
(“Maxim”) pursuant
to an Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of July 12, 2020
(as it may be amended from time to time, the “Merger Agreement”), by and among
ADI, Magneto Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of ADI (“Acquisition Sub”) and Maxim. On
September 4, 2020, ADI filed with the SEC the definitive joint
proxy statement/prospectus relating to the special meeting of
shareholders of ADI scheduled to be held on October 8, 2020
(the “Definitive Proxy
Statement”) to, among other things, vote on a proposal to
approve the issuance of shares of ADI common stock to Maxim
stockholders in connection with the merger.
Since the initial filing of the Form S-4, six complaints (collectively, the
“Maxim Stockholder
Complaints”), including two putative securities class action
lawsuits, have been filed in federal courts in California, Delaware
and New York by purported Maxim stockholders against Maxim and the
members of the Maxim board of directors in connection with the
transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement: Shiva Stein v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc.,
et al., Case No. 5:20-cv-05830 (N.D. Cal., filed
August 18, 2020); Joseph Post
v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., et al., Case No.
1:99-mc-09999 (D. Del.,
filed August 24, 2020) (the “Post Action”); Waseem Khan v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc.,
et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03982 (E.D.N.Y., filed
August 26, 2020); Joseph Burns
v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-07168 (S.D.N.Y., filed
September 2, 2020); John
Husselman v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., et al., Case
No. 1:20-cv-07525 (S.D.N.Y., filed
September 14, 2020); and Joseph Schaffer v. Maxim Integrated Products,
Inc. et al., Case No. 5:20-cv-06816 (N.D. Cal., filed
September 30, 2020). The Post Action also names ADI and Acquisition
Sub as defendants. In addition, one complaint, Coe Living Trust v. Analog Devices, Inc., et
al., Case No. 1:20-cv-11682 (D. Mass.,
filed September 11, 2020), has been filed by a purported ADI
shareholder in federal court in Massachusetts against ADI and the
members of the ADI board of directors (the “Coe Action” and, together with
the Maxim Stockholder Complaints, the “Federal Stockholder Complaints”)
and one derivative lawsuit has been filed against the members of
the ADI board of directors in state court in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts (Mass. Sup. Ct., Norfolk Cnty., Case No. 20-0864, filed
September 11, 2020) (the “ADI State Action” and, together
with the Federal Stockholder Complaints, the “Stockholder Actions”). Each of
the Federal Stockholder Complaints alleges, among other things,
that the Form S-4 omits
material information concerning the transactions contemplated by
the Merger Agreement in violation of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule
14a-9 promulgated under the
Exchange Act. The ADI State Action alleges breach of fiduciary duty
claims against ADI’s directors in connection with the transactions
contemplated by the Merger Agreement, including that the directors
fraudulently concealed information based on allegations that the
Form S-4 misrepresents or
omits material information concerning the transactions contemplated
by the Merger Agreement. The plaintiffs in the Federal Stockholder
Complaints and the ADI State Action, among other things, seek to
enjoin the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement (and
in two cases, to enjoin the shareholder vote) or, in the
alternative, rescission of the merger or rescissionary damages, and
an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses.
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES
This supplemental information
should be read in conjunction with the Definitive Proxy Statement,
which should be read in its entirety. Page references in the below
disclosures are to pages in the Definitive Proxy Statement, and
defined terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set
forth in the Definitive Proxy Statement. To the extent the
following information differs from or conflicts with the
information contained in the Definitive Proxy Statement, the
information set forth below shall be deemed to supersede the
respective information in the Definitive Proxy Statement. ADI and
Maxim deny the allegations in the complaints related to the
Stockholder Actions and deny any alleged violations of law or any
legal or equitable duty. Without admitting in any way that the
disclosures below are material or otherwise required by law, ADI
and Maxim make the following amended and supplemental disclosures
solely for the purpose of mooting the allegations in the complaints
related to the Stockholder Actions.