In The Circuit Court of The Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, In and For Hillsborough County, Florida X : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : X

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Master File No. 05-CV H(RBB) CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION HERBERT CROWELL, On Behalf of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION. Master File No. 02-CV-2775-MRP (PLAx) CLASS ACTION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED PARTIAL SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITY

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

: : CLASS ACTION : : : : : : : : : NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION TABLE OF CONTENTS

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION. No. 3:15-cv EMC

NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION, PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION, AND SETTLEMENT HEARING

GLS Dublin OH *P-GLS$F-POC/1*

A Federal Court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT BOWLING GREEN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTION AND SETTLEMENT HEARING

NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WITH ALL DEFENDANTS, MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND SETTLEMENT FAIRNESS HEARING

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND SETTLEMENT OF SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTION

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION AND DERIVATIVE LAWSUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. x : : : : : : : x CLASS ACTION NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. x In re PALL CORP. SECURITIES LITIGATION : : :

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Master File No. 05-CV-2335-H(CAB) CLASS ACTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE FORM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION In re HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case3:11-cv EMC Document70 Filed03/06/14 Page1 of 43

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF STOCKHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION

Case 2:16-cv ADS-AKT Document 24 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 28 PageID #: 161

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS. Plaintiff, Index No.: /2006 Justice Carolyn E. Demarest

CAUSE NO

PROOF OF CLAIM FORM AND RELEASE INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE FORM

Case 2:11-cv CMR Document 25-6 Filed 02/06/12 Page 1 of 13 EXHIBIT D

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION AND SETTLEMENT HEARING

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION. Civil Action FILE No. 1:00-CV-1416-CC

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLfEAS p H. D H lit ui Item 4u.i CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO

Polycom, Inc. Settlement c/o Garden City Group, LLC PO Box 10281

Case5:09-cv JW Document146-3 Filed08/25/11 Page1 of 13. Exhibit A-2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION EXHIBIT A-1

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE

Proof of Claim and Release Form DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION: AUGUST 4, 2017

THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) Consolidated C.A. No VCL

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE FORM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

In re Altair Nanotechnologies Shareholder Derivative Litigation CASE NO.: 14-CV TPG-HBP

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IBEW LOCAL UNION 98, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

P.O. Box Dublin, OH Toll-Free: (877) Settlement Website:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA : : Civil Action No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND (Southern Division) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 8:16-cv RWT CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Un i t e d St a t e s Di s t r i c t Co u r t

01-CA4180. X0791 v.05 1

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

Representative or Custodian Name (if different from Beneficial Owner(s) listed above) City State ZIP Code

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Case No. 12-C-884-JPS CLASS ACTION PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE FORM

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

* * * * * * * * * * * * * CIRCUIT COURT v. LINDA F. POWERS, et al., * MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Defendants. STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT OF SETTLEMENT

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE. Gentiva Securities Litigation PO Box 3058 Portland, OR

EXHIBITB UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELA WARE

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CENTRAL DIVISION. Special Title (Rule 1550(b)) PROCEEDING NO.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE FORM AND SUBSTITUTE FORM W-9

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CIV PHX-RJB CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE FORM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT

OBJECT NO LATER THAN JULY 5, 2016 GO TO A HEARING DO NOTHING

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING AT SEATTLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION, SETTLEMENT HEARING AND APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Transcription:

In The Circuit Court of The Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, In and For Hillsborough County, Florida MATILDA FRANZITTA, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant AEROSONIC CORPORATION, Plaintiff vs. DAVID A. BALDINI, THOMAS E. WHYTAS, ROBERT J. MCGILL, P. MARK PERKINS, DAVID M. VOSEN, J. MERVYN NABORS, ERIC J. MCCRAKEN, MICHAEL T. REED, ANDREW J. NORSTRUD, JOSEPH P. SHERMAN, JR., CARMELO RUSSO, MELISSA CLARK DALEY, DAN GARWACKI, A. TODD BEARD, CHARLES M. FOSTER, JR.,ANDREW J. MCADAMS, and PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP Defendants, -and- AEROSONIC CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Nominal Defendant. X X CASE NO. 05-02547 NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTION TO ALL PERSONS WHO CURRENTLY OWN AEROSONIC COMMON STOCK PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS ENTIRETY. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY PROCEEDINGS IN THIS ACTION. This Notice has been sent to you pursuant to Florida Statute 607.07401, and an order of the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, Florida (the Court ), following the execution of a Stipulation of Settlement signed by the parties on July 1, 2005 (the Stipulation ). The purpose of this Notice is to inform you of the proposed settlement (the Settlement ) of the above-captioned shareholder derivative action (the Action ) and of the hearing to be held by the Court to consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the Settlement. This Notice describes the rights you may have in connection with the Settlement and what steps you may take in relation to the Settlement. This Notice is not intended to be and should not be construed as an expression of any opinion by the Court about the merits of any of the claims or defenses asserted by any party in the Action or the fairness or adequacy of the Settlement. A final settlement hearing (the Settlement Hearing ) will be held on November 21, 2005 at 230 p.m., before The Honorable Margaret Honeywell, to determine whether (1) the Settlement should be approved as fair, adequate and reasonable; and (2) Representative Plaintiff Counsel s 1 fee award should be approved. If the Court approves the Settlement, the Action will be dismissed with prejudice. I. THE ACTION On March 21, 2005, Plaintiff commenced the Action when she filed her Verified Derivative Complaint. The Action alleges, among other things, that (i) current and former directors of Aerosonic breached fiduciary duties owed to Aerosonic by (a) perpetrating accounting fraud that damaged Aerosonic, (b) failing to detect or prevent the alleged accounting fraud, or (c) failing to pursue claims against other Defendants related to the alleged accounting fraud, (ii) certain Defendants aided and abetted alleged breaches of fiduciary duty, (iii) Defendant PwC breached an alleged contract with Aerosonic to provide accounting services, and (iv) PwC acted negligently in failing to detect or prevent the alleged account fraud. The Action seeks, among other things, unspecified damages and disgorgement of unspecified alleged ill-gotten gains allegedly received by certain of the Defendants. By entering into this Settlement, the Settling Parties have agreed that the Action should be compromised on the terms set forth herein and that, in connection with final court approval of the settlement, the Action will be dismissed with prejudice as to all of the Settling Parties. 1 See section VIII for a listing of the definitions used in this Notice.

II. DISCOVERY, INVESTIGATION AND RESEARCH CONDUCTED BY PLAINTIFF Plaintiff s Settlement Counsel represents that they have conducted an extensive investigation into the facts and circumstances associated with Aerosonic during the pendency, development and prosecution of the Action. Plaintiff s Settlement Counsel also represents that this discovery and investigation has included, inter alia (i) a review and analysis of Aerosonic s financial filings and related news articles; (ii) a review and analysis of relevant legal authorities; (iii) inspecting, reviewing and analyzing certain documents produced by, or otherwise relating to, Aerosonic; and (iv) participating in numerous telephonic meetings with Aerosonic s counsel. III. DEFENDANTS DENIAL OF WRONGDOING AND LIABILITY Defendants have denied and continue to deny each and all of the claims and contentions alleged by Plaintiff in the Action. Defendants also have denied and continue to deny, inter alia, the allegations that Plaintiff or Aerosonic have suffered any damages. Defendants expressly have denied and continue to deny all charges of wrongdoing or liability against them arising out of any of the conduct, statements, acts or omissions alleged, or that could have been alleged, in the Action. Each of the Defendants denies and continues to deny the allegations concerning any alleged breach of fiduciary duty, mismanagement, misappropriation and/or waste of corporate assets or unjust enrichment. The Defendants have further asserted and continue to assert that at all relevant times, they acted in good faith and in a manner they reasonably believed to be in the best interests of Aerosonic and Aerosonic stockholders. Nonetheless, Defendants have concluded that further litigation would be protracted and expensive, and that it is desirable that the Action be fully and finally settled in the manner and upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Stipulation. Defendants also have taken into account the uncertainty and risks inherent in any litigation, especially in complex shareholder litigation like the Action. Defendants have, therefore, determined that it is desirable and beneficial to them that the Action be settled in the manner and upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Stipulation. IV. BENEFITS CONFERRED BY THE SETTLEMENT As a result of the filing, prosecution and Settlement of the Action, Aerosonic has agreed to implement or will implement the following corporate governance enhancements upon final approval of the Settlement A. The Company has agreed to appoint a new, independent director to its Board; B. The Audit Committee shall have the standing authority to investigate any matters that it deems appropriate. In connection therewith, the Audit Committee shall have the standing authority to retain, at the Company s expense, any expert[s] that it deems necessary to assist it in its investigation. The Settling Parties agree that the foregoing corporate governance principles have or will materially benefit Aerosonic and its stockholders. V. REASONS FOR THE SETTLEMENT Plaintiff believes that the claims asserted in the Action have merit and that the evidence developed to date supports the claims asserted. However, Plaintiff s Settlement Counsel recognizes and acknowledges the expense and length of continued proceedings necessary to prosecute the Action against Defendants through trial and through appeals. Plaintiff s Settlement Counsel has also taken into account the uncertain outcome and the risk of any litigation, especially in complex shareholder litigation such as the Action, as well as the difficulties and delays inherent in such litigation. Plaintiff s Settlement Counsel is also mindful of the inherent problems of proof under, and possible defenses to, the violations asserted in the Action, including, but not limited to, the possibility that a Special Litigation Committee could determine that continued prosecution of the Action is not in Aerosonic s best interests, which would result in a dismissal of the Action with no recovery obtained by Aerosonic. Based on these considerations, among others, Plaintiff s Settlement Counsel believes that the Settlement confers substantial benefits upon Aerosonic and Aerosonic Stockholders. VI. NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED SETTLEMENT A Settlement Hearing will be held on November 21, 2005, at 230 p.m., before The Honorable Margaret Honeywell at the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, Florida (the Settlement Hearing ). The purpose of the Settlement Hearing will be to determine whether (1) the Settlement should be approved as fair, reasonable and adequate; and (2) to approve Representative Plaintiff Counsel s fee award. The Court will also rule upon any other matters that are before it. The Court may adjourn the Settlement Hearing by oral announcement at such hearing or at any adjournment without further notice of any kind. The Court may approve the Settlement with or without modifications, enter an Order and Final Judgment, and order the payment of attorneys fees and expenses without further notice of any kind. 2

VII. THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD AT THE HEARING Any Current Aerosonic Stockholder may, but is not required to, enter an appearance in the Action and be represented by counsel of his, her or its choice and expense. Any Current Aerosonic Stockholder who does not enter an appearance will be represented by the attorneys for plaintiff listed below. Any Current Aerosonic Stockholder who objects to any aspect of the Settlement may appear and be heard at the Settlement Hearing. Any such person must submit a written notice of objection, sent via first class mail or hand delivered such that it is received on or before November 14, 2005, by each of the following CLERK OF THE COURT 800 East Twiggs Street Suite 530 Tampa, Florida 33602 Robert B. Weiser, Esq. The Weiser Law Firm, P.C. 121 North Wayne Avenue Suite 100 Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087 Stanley H. Wakshlag, Esq. Akerman Senterfitt One S.E. 3rd Avenue Miami, Florida 33131 Geoffrey F. Aronow, Esq. Heller, Ehrman LLP 1717 Rhode Island Avenue Washington, D.C. 20036 In order to object to the Settlement, the notice of objection must include the objecting Person s name, address and telephone number, and proof of the objecting Person s standing as a Current Aerosonic Stockholder. In addition, to be heard by the Court, the objecting Person must (1) include a detailed statement of the basis for the Person s objections to or comments upon the Settlement, Representative Plaintiff Counsel s fee award, or any other matter before the Court; (2) any supporting papers, including all documents and writings that the Person desires the Court to consider; (3) the identities of any witness[es] that the objecting Person plans on calling to testify at the Settlement Hearing; and (4) the substance of any testimony that the witness[es] will provide at the Final Hearing. Only Current Aerosonic Stockholders who have submitted written notices of objection in this manner will be entitled to be heard at the Settlement Hearing, although attendance at the Settlement Hearing is not necessary in order for an objection to be considered by the Court. However, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, any Current Aerosonic Stockholder who does not make his, her or its objection or opposition to the Settlement in the manner provided above shall be deemed to have waived all objections and opposition to the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the Settlement and the requested attorneys fees and expenses. VIII. DEFINITIONS USED IN THIS NOTICE As used herein, the following terms have the meanings specified below A. Current Aerosonic Stockholder or Current Aerosonic Stockholders means any record and/or beneficial owner of Aerosonic common stock as of August 16, 2005. B. Defendants means Aerosonic, and any of its subsidiaries and/or affiliates, David A. Baldini, Thomas E. Whytas, Robert J. McGill, P. Mark Perkins, David M. Vosen, J. Mervyn Nabors, Eric J. McCracken, Michael T. Reed, Andrew J. Norstrud, Joseph P. Sherman, Jr., Carmelo Russo, Melissa Clark Daley, Dan Garwacki, A. Todd Beard, Charles M. Foster, Jr., PwC, and Andrew J. McAdams. C. Judgment means the Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal to be rendered by the Court, substantially in the form attached as Exhibit C to the Stipulation. D. Person means an individual, corporation, limited liability company, professional corporation, limited liability partnership, partnership, limited partnership, association, joint stock company, estate, legal representative, trust, unincorporated association, government or any political subdivision or agency thereof, and any business or legal entity and their spouses, heirs, predecessors, successors, representatives, or assignees. 3

E. Plaintiff s Settlement Counsel means The Weiser Law Firm, P.C., Robert B. Weiser, 121 N. Wayne Ave., Suite 100, Wayne, PA 19087, Telephone (610) 225-2677. F. Related Parties means each of a Defendant s past or present directors, officers, managers, employees, partners, members, principals, agents, underwriters, insurers, co-insurers, reinsurers, controlling shareholders, attorneys, accountants or auditors, banks or investment banks, associates, personal or legal representatives, predecessors, successors, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, joint ventures, assigns, spouses, heirs, executors, administrators, affiliates, related or affiliated entities, any entity in which a Defendant has a controlling interest, any members of their immediate families, or any trust of which any Defendant is the settlor or which is for the benefit of any Defendant and/or member(s) of his or her family. G. Released Claims shall collectively mean all claims (including Unknown Claims ), demands, rights, liabilities and causes of action of every nature and description whatsoever, known or unknown, whether or not concealed or hidden, asserted or that might have been asserted by Plaintiff directly or Current Aerosonic Stockholders derivatively on behalf of Aerosonic, or any of them, against the Defendants in the Action, that are based upon or related in any way to the facts, circumstances, transactions, events, occurrences, disclosures, statements, omissions, acts or failures to act which (i) were alleged or could have been alleged in the Action; (ii) relate to the settlement of the Shareholder Class Action; or (iii) relate to the conduct of any of the Defendants in negotiating the settlement of the Shareholder Class Action; including, without limitation, claims for negligence, gross negligence, breach of duty of care and/or breach of duty of loyalty, fraud, constructive fraud, selfdealing, misrepresentation (whether intentional, negligent or innocent), omission (whether intentional, negligent or innocent), suppression (whether intentional, negligent or innocent), mismanagement, gross mismanagement, abuse of control, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty or violations of any state statute, rules or regulations or any other source of legal or equitable obligation of any kind or description in whatever forum. H. Released Persons means each and all of the Defendants and their respective Related Parties. I. Representative Plaintiff s Counsel means The Weiser Law Firm, P.C., and Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman Robbins LLP. J. Settling Parties means, collectively, each of Defendants and the Plaintiff on her own behalf and derivatively on behalf of Aerosonic and Current Aerosonic Stockholders. K. Shareholder Class Action shall mean that certain case styled In re Aerosonic Corporation Securities Litigation, C.A. No. 803-CV-2373-T24 TBM., which is pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. L. Unknown Claims means any Released Claims which any Plaintiff, Aerosonic or Current Aerosonic Stockholder does not know or suspect to exist in his, her or its favor at the time of the release of the Released Persons which, if known by him, her or it, might have affected his, her or its settlement with and release of the Released Persons, or might have affected his, her or its decision not to object to this settlement. The Plaintiff, Aerosonic or Current Aerosonic Stockholders may hereafter discover facts in addition to or different from those which he, she or it now knows or believes to be true with respect to the subject matter of the Released Claims, but each Plaintiff, Aerosonic or Current Aerosonic Stockholder shall expressly, upon the Effective Date, be deemed to have, and by operation of the Judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever settled and released any and all Released Claims, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, contingent or non-contingent, whether or not concealed or hidden, which now exist, or heretofore have existed upon any theory of law or equity now existing or coming into existence in the future, including, but not limited to, conduct which is negligent, intentional, with or without malice, or a breach of any duty, law or rule, without regard to the subsequent discovery or existence of such different or additional facts. The Plaintiff acknowledges, and Current Aerosonic Stockholders shall be deemed by operation of the Judgment to have acknowledged, that the foregoing waiver was separately bargained for and a key element of the settlement of which this release is a material and essential part and expressly waive (i) the benefits of the provisions of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides that A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor and (ii) the benefits of any comparable law, statute, regulation or legal principle of any other jurisdiction. 4

IX. DISMISSAL AND RELEASES If the Settlement is approved, the Court will enter a Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice, pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation ( Judgment ). The Judgment will dismiss the Released Claims against the Released Persons with prejudice as to all Defendants. X. ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSES Aerosonic and PwC, on behalf of all Defendants have agreed, upon approval by the Court, that for Representative Plaintiff Counsel s efforts in filing, prosecuting and settling the Action, Plaintiffs Settlement Counsel shall be paid attorney s fees and reimbursement of expenses in an amount not to exceed $75,000.00. To date, Representative Plaintiff Counsel have not received any payment for their services in prosecuting the Action, nor have they been reimbursed for their out-of-pocket expenses. The fee requested by Representative Plaintiff Counsel would compensate them for their efforts in achieving the benefits described herein and for their risk in undertaking this representation on a contingent basis. XI. NOTICE TO PERSONS OR ENTITIES HOLDING RECORD OWNERSHIP ON BEHALF OF OTHERS Brokerage firms, banks and other persons or entities who are Current Aerosonic Stockholders in their capacities as record owners, but not as beneficial owners, are requested to send this Notice promptly to beneficial owners. Additional copies of this Notice for transmittal to beneficial owners are available on request directed to Aerosonic Corporation Derivative Litigation Heffler, Radetich & Saitta L.L.P. P.O. Box 58249 Philadelphia, PA 19102-8249 XII. EXAMINATION OF PAPERS This Notice is a summary and does not describe all of the details of the Stipulation. For full details of the matters discussed in this Notice, you may desire to review the Stipulation filed with the Court, which may be inspected during business hours, at the office of the Clerk of the Court, 800 E. Twiggs Street, Tampa, Florida. For further information regarding the Settlement you may contact Robert Weiser at The Weiser Law Firm, P.C., toll free at 1-866-934-7372. DATED August 16, 2005 DO NOT TELEPHONE THE COURT REGARDING THIS NOTICE. 5

Robert B. Weiser, Esq. The Weiser Law Firm, P.C. 121 North Wayne Avenue Suite 100 Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087