13.07.2015 Views

B-1 STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Dated May 1 ...

B-1 STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Dated May 1 ...

B-1 STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Dated May 1 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

APPENDIX E - Legal ProceedingsTempletonIn 2003 and 2004, multiple lawsuits were filed against Franklin Resources, Inc., and certain of itsinvestment adviser subsidiaries, among other defendants, alleging violations of federal securities and statelaws and seeking, among other relief, monetary damages, restitution, removal of fund trustees, directors,investment managers, administrators, and distributors, rescission of management contracts and 12-b1plans, and/or attorney’s fees and costs. Specifically, the lawsuits claim breach of duty with respect toalleged arrangements to permit market timing and/or late trading activity, or breach of duty with respectto the valuation of the portfolio securities of certain Templeton funds managed by Franklin Resources,Inc. subsidiaries, allegedly resulting in market timing activity. The lawsuits are styled as class actions, orderivative actions on behalf of either the named funds or Franklin Resources, Inc. and have beenconsolidated for pretrial purposes along with hundreds of other similar lawsuits against other mutual fundcompanies. All of the Franklin Templeton Investments mutual funds that were named in the litigation asdefendants have since been dismissed, as have the independent trustees to those funds.Franklin Resources, Inc. previously disclosed these private lawsuits in its regulatory filings and on itspublic website. Any material updates regarding these matters will be disclosed in Franklin Resources,Inc.’s Form 10-Q or Form 10-K filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.Janus CapitalIn the fall of 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Office of the New York StateAttorney General (“NYAG”), the Colorado Attorney General (“COAG”), and the Colorado Division ofSecurities (“CDS”) announced that they were investigating alleged frequent trading practices in themutual fund industry. On August 18, 2004, Janus Capital announced that it had reached final settlementswith the SEC, the NYAG, the COAG, and the CDS related to such regulators’ investigations into JanusCapital’ frequent trading arrangements.A number of civil lawsuits were brought against Janus Capital and certain of its affiliates, the Janus funds,and related entities and individuals based on allegations similar to those announced by the aboveregulators and were filed in several state and federal jurisdictions. Such lawsuits alleged a variety oftheories for recovery including, but not limited to, the federal securities laws, other federal statutes(including ERISA), and various common law doctrines. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigationtransferred these actions to the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (the “Court”) forcoordinated proceedings. On September 29, 2004, five consolidated amended complaints were filed withthe Court, four of which still remain: (i) claims by a putative class of investors in certain Janus fundsasserting claims on behalf of the investor class (Marini et al. v. Janus Investment Fund et al., U.S. DistrictCourt, District of Maryland, Case No. 04-CV-00497); (ii) derivative claims by investors in certain Janusfunds ostensibly on behalf of such funds (Steinberg et al. v. Janus Capital Management LLC et al., U.S.District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. 04-CV-00518); (iii) claims on behalf of participants in theJanus 401(k) plan (Wangberger v. Janus Capital Group, Inc., 401(k) Advisory Committee , et al., U.S.District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. JFM-05-2711); and (iv) claims by a putative class ofshareholders of Janus Capital Group Inc. (“JCGI”) asserting claims on behalf of the shareholders(Wiggins et al. v. Janus Capital Group, Inc., et al., U.S. District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. 04-CV-00818). Each of the complaints initially named JCGI and/or Janus Capital as a defendant. In addition,the following were also named as defendants in one or more of the actions: Janus Investment Fund(“JIF”), Janus Aspen Series (“JAS”), Janus Adviser Series (“JAD”), Janus Distributors LLC, INTECHInvestment Management LLC (“INTECH”) (formerly named Enhanced Investment Technologies, LLC),Bay Isle Financial LLC (“Bay Isle”), Perkins Investment Management LLC (“Perkins”) (formerly namedPerkins, Wolf, McDonnell and Company, LLC), the Advisory Committee of the Janus 401(k) plan, andthe current or former directors of JCGI.B-93

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!