Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against magicJack VocalTec Ltd.

Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of magicJack VocalTec Ltd. (“magicJack” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ GM: CALL) between February 28, 2012 and January 8, 2013, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers (the “Complaint”).

If you purchased shares of magicJack during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold magicJack, and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, NY at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to info@rigrodskylong.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/magicjack-vocaltec-ltd-call.

magicJack is a cloud communications leader that is the inventor of voice-over-Internet-Protocol (“VoIP”), the softphone (“magicJack PC”) and the award winning magicJack products. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and omitted materially adverse facts, about the Company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that: (i) the Company overstated revenue, earnings and cash flow in its United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings; (ii) the Company overstated its cash balance by investing its shareholder cash in highly aggressive and unconventional securities; (iii) the Company has overstated its earnings by inconsistently treating its allowance for doubtful accounts and billing adjustments; (iv) the Company improperly altered the estimated life of its assets, causing a decrease in its depreciation expense; (v) while the Company claimed that it was writing down its excess inventory of chips, it instead wrote down finished products in order to hide weakening sales momentum; and (vi) as a result of the above, the Company’s financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading statements, the Company’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.

According to the Complaint, on January 9, 2013, Copperfield Research published a report revealing, among other things, that the Company had been consistently overstating its revenue and profitability. According to the report, “magicJack has presented its retail investor base with earnings press release and financial tables that are overstated and later altered based on the corresponding SEC filings.” On this news, shares in magicJack fell over 13%, closing at $15.30 per share on January 9, 2013, from a close of $17.31 per share on January 8, 2012, on volume of over 1.8 million shares.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than March 19, 2013. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

While Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. did not file the Complaint in this matter, the firm, with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.