On December 18, 2024, Altair Engineering Inc. (the “Company” or “Altair”) filed its definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A (as such may be supplemented from time to time, the “Proxy Statement”) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) with respect to the special meeting of Altair’s stockholders (the “Special Meeting”) to be held in connection with transactions contemplated by that certain Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”), dated as of October 30, 2024, by and among the Company, Siemens Industry Software Inc. (“Siemens Industry”) and Astra Merger Sub Inc. (“Merger Sub”), pursuant to which Merger Sub will merge with and into the Company (the “Merger”), with the Company surviving as a wholly owned subsidiary of Siemens Industry. The Special Meeting will be held virtually on January 22, 2025 at 10:00 a.m., Eastern Time to act on the proposal to adopt the Merger Agreement and certain other proposals as disclosed in the Proxy Statement. The information contained in this Current Report on Form 8-K (this “Form 8-K”) should be read in conjunction with the Proxy Statement, which should be read in its entirety.
Litigation Relating to the Merger
As of the date of this Form 8-K, three lawsuits relating to the Merger (collectively, the “Lawsuits”) have been filed: (i) Elstein v. Altair Engineering Inc., et al., Case No. 2025-211856-CB (the “Elstein Lawsuit”), which was filed in the State of Michigan Circuit Court for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Oakland County, on January 3, 2025 and (ii) Jones v. Altair Engineering Inc., et al., Index No. 650098/2025 (the “Jones Lawsuit”) and Kent v. Altair Engineering Inc., et al., Index No. 650113/2025 (the “Kent Lawsuit”), both of which were filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, on January 7, 2025 and January 8, 2025, respectively. The Elstein Lawsuit was filed by a purported stockholder of the Company as an individual action and alleges that the Proxy Statement was materially incomplete due to certain misrepresentations and omissions in violation of Michigan’s Uniform Securities Act and Michigan common law. The Elstein Lawsuit names as defendants the Company, its directors and Siemens Industry, and seeks, among other relief, an order enjoining the closing of the vote on the Merger. The Jones Lawsuit and the Kent Lawsuit were each filed by a purported stockholder of the Company as an individual action and allege that the Proxy Statement was materially incomplete due to certain misrepresentations and omissions in violation of New York common law. The Jones Lawsuit and Kent Lawsuit name as defendants the Company and its directors and seek, among other relief, an order enjoining the consummation of the Merger. There can be no assurance regarding the ultimate outcome of the Lawsuits.
As of the date of this Form 8-K, multiple purported stockholders of the Company have also delivered demand letters to the Company (collectively, the “Demand Letters”) alleging that the disclosures contained in the Proxy Statement are deficient and requesting that the Company supplement such disclosures prior to the Special Meeting. The Demand Letters also threaten the Company with lawsuits in the event that the purported deficiencies in the Proxy Statement are not addressed.
It is possible that additional, similar complaints may be filed, that the Lawsuits described above may be amended, or that additional demand letters will be received by the Company. If this occurs, the Company does not intend to announce the filing or receipt of each additional, similar complaint or demand letter or any amended complaint unless required by law.
The Company believes that the claims asserted in the Lawsuits and the Demand Letters are without merit. However, in order to moot the unmeritorious disclosure claims, alleviate the costs, risks and uncertainties inherent in litigation and provide additional information to its stockholders, the Company has determined to voluntarily supplement the Proxy Statement as described in this Form 8-K. Nothing in this Form 8-K shall be deemed an admission of the legal necessity or materiality under applicable laws of any of the disclosures set forth herein. To the contrary, the Company specifically denies all allegations set forth in the Lawsuits and the Demand Letters that any additional disclosure in the Proxy Statement was or is required.
Supplemental Disclosures
The following disclosures supplement the disclosures contained in the Proxy Statement and should be read in conjunction with the disclosures contained in the Proxy Statement, which should be read in its entirety. To the extent the information set forth herein differs from or updates information contained in the Proxy Statement, the information set forth herein shall supersede or supplement the information in the Proxy Statement. All page references are to pages in the Proxy Statement, and terms used below, unless otherwise defined, have the meanings set forth in the Proxy Statement.
(a) In the section of the Proxy Statement titled “The Merger (Proposal 1)—Background of the Merger,” the disclosure in the eighth full paragraph on page 42 is amended by adding the following sentence to the end of such paragraph: