Item 8.01 Other Events.
On November 3, 2021, NeoPhotonics Corporation, a Delaware corporation (NeoPhotonics or the Company), Lumentum Holdings Inc., a
Delaware corporation (Lumentum or Parent), and Neptune Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Lumentum (Merger Sub), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the
Merger Agreement).
Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, NeoPhotonics will be acquired by Lumentum through a merger of Merger Sub
with and into NeoPhotonics (the Merger), with NeoPhotonics surviving the Merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of Lumentum.
In connection with
the proposed merger, NeoPhotonics filed a preliminary proxy statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) on December 1, 2021 (the Preliminary Proxy Statement), and NeoPhotonics filed a definitive proxy
statement with the SEC on December 23, 2021 (the Definitive Proxy Statement). The Company commenced mailing the Definitive Proxy Statement on or about December 23, 2021.
Between December 3, 2021 and January 5, 2022, ten lawsuits (captioned Elaine Wang v. NeoPhotonics Corporation, et al., No. 1:21-cv-10338 (S.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 3, 2021), Mengsheng Ku v. NeoPhotonics Corporation, et al., No.
5:21-cv-09479 (N.D. Cal. filed Dec. 8, 2021), Heather Smith v. NeoPhotonics Corporation, et al., No.
1:21-cv-10698 (S.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 14, 2021), Matthew Hopkins v. NeoPhotonics Corporation, et al., No.
1:21-cv-10725 (S.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 15, 2021), James Hendrickson v. NeoPhotonics Corporation, et al., No.
1:21-cv-06919 (E.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 15, 2021), Stephen Bushansky v. NeoPhotonics Corporation et al., Case No. 5:21-cv-09825 (N.D. Cal. filed Dec. 20, 2021), Alex Ciccotelli v. NeoPhotonics Corporation et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-05611 (E.D.
Pa. filed Dec. 23, 2021), Christopher Taylor v. NeoPhotonics Corporation et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00002 (D. Del. filed Jan. 3, 2022), John Ryan v. NeoPhotonics
Corporation et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00046 (S.D.N.Y. filed Jan. 4, 2022), and James Parshall v. NeoPhotonics Corporation et al., Case No.
5:22-cv-00055 (N.D. Cal. filed Jan. 5, 2022)), were filed in federal court by alleged NeoPhotonics stockholders challenging the Merger. The complaints name NeoPhotonics
and NeoPhotonics board of directors as defendants. The complaints assert violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, and 17 C.F.R. § 244.100 against
NeoPhotonics and the individual defendants, as well as violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the individual defendants. The plaintiffs contend that the Preliminary Proxy Statement filed with the SEC on December 1, 2021,
or the Definitive Proxy Statement filed with the SEC on December 23, 2021, omitted or misrepresented material information regarding the Merger. The complaints seek injunctive relief, rescission, or rescissory damages, dissemination of a proxy
statement that discloses certain information requested by the plaintiffs, and an award of plaintiffs costs, including attorneys fees and expenses.
Between December 20 and December 22, 2021, the Company also received two demand letters from purported stockholders of the Company challenging the
Merger and asserting that the Preliminary Proxy Statement omitted or misrepresented material information regarding the Merger.
NeoPhotonics believes that
no further disclosure is required to supplement the Definitive Proxy Statement under applicable laws. However, to minimize the expense and distraction of responding to such actions and letters, NeoPhotonics is providing additional disclosures
related to the Merger and transactions related thereto, which are set forth below, supplementing the disclosures in the Definitive Proxy Statement (the Supplemental Disclosures). Nothing in this Current Report on Form 8-K shall be deemed an admission of the legal necessity or materiality under applicable laws of any of the Supplemental Disclosures set forth herein. To the contrary, the Company specifically denies all allegations
in the complaints that any additional disclosure was or is required.
These Supplemental Disclosures will not affect the merger consideration to be paid
to the Companys stockholders in connection with the Merger or the timing of the Companys virtual special meeting of stockholders scheduled to be held online via live webcast on February 1, 2022 at 9:00 a.m., Pacific Time, at
https://web.lumiagm.com/290418259. The Board of Directors unanimously recommends, on behalf of NeoPhotonics that you vote: (1) FOR the adoption of the Merger Agreement; (2) FOR the approval, on an advisory (non-binding) basis, of the Compensation Proposal; and (3) FOR the Adjournment Proposal.
Supplemental Disclosures to the Definitive Proxy Statement/Prospectus
The following Supplemental Disclosures should be read in conjunction with the Definitive Proxy Statement, which should be read in its entirety. To the extent
that information in the Supplemental Disclosures differs from or updates information contained in the Definitive Proxy Statement, the information in the supplemental disclosures shall supersede or supplement the information in the Proxy Statement.
Defined terms used but not defined in the Supplemental Disclosures have the meanings set forth in the Definitive Proxy Statement. Paragraph and page references used herein refer to the Definitive Proxy Statement before any additions or deletions
resulting from the Supplemental Disclosures.