STAPLES,INC. (NASDAQ:SPLS) Files An 8-K Other EventsItem 8.01. Other Events.
As previously disclosed, (i)on June28, 2017, Staples,Inc. (the “Company”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) with Arch Parent Inc. (“Parent”) and Arch Merger Sub Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent (“Merger Sub”), providing for the merger of Merger Sub with and into the Company, with the Company surviving the merger as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent (the “Merger”), (ii)Parent and Merger Sub are beneficially owned by funds managed by Sycamore Partners Management, L.P. (“Sycamore”), (iii)on August4, 2017 a purported class action lawsuit relating to the Merger, captioned Raymond Haag v. Staples,Inc. et al., Civil Action No.1:17-cv-11447, was filed against the Company, each of its directors, Sycamore, Merger Sub and Parent in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (the “Massachusetts Federal Court”), (iv)on August8, 2017 a second purported class action lawsuit relating to the Merger, captioned Stephen Bushansky v. Staples,Inc. et al., Civil Action No.1:17-cv-11464, was filed against the Company and each of its directors in the Massachusetts Federal Court, (v)also on August8, 2017 a third purported class action lawsuit relating to the Merger, captioned Michael Huntley v. Staples,Inc. et al., Civil Action No.1:17-cv-11467, was filed against the Company and each of its directors in the Massachusetts Federal Court and (vi)on August10, 2017 a fourth purported class action lawsuit relating to the Merger, captioned Leif Haugen v. Staples,Inc. et al., Civil Action No.1:17-cv-11480, was filed against the Company and each of its directors in the Massachusetts Federal Court. The actions referenced in clauses (iii)through (vi)above are referred to collectively as the “Federal Actions.” Each of the Federal Actions alleges violations of Sections 14(a)and 20(a)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule14a-9 promulgated thereunder against the applicable defendants for allegedly disseminating a false or materially incomplete and misleading proxy statement in connection with the Merger. The plaintiffs in each Federal Action seek various forms of injunctive and declaratory relief, as well an award of costs and attorneys’ fees.
On August25, 2017, the Company and the plaintiffs in the Federal Actions entered into a memorandum of understanding in which the plaintiffs in the Federal Actions agreed to dismiss their individual claims with prejudice, and to dismiss claims asserted on behalf of the putative class without prejudice, in return for the Company’s agreement to make the supplemental disclosures set forth herein.
The Company believes that no further supplemental disclosure is required under applicable laws and that the definitive proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on August3, 2017 (the “Proxy Statement”) disclosed all material information required to be disclosed therein. However, to avoid the risk of the Federal Actions delaying or adversely affecting the Merger and to minimize the expense of defending such actions, it has agreed, to the terms of the memorandum of understanding, to make certain supplemental disclosures related to the proposed Merger, all of which are set forth below and which should be read in conjunction with the Proxy Statement.
The memorandum of understanding will not affect the amount of the merger consideration that the Company’s stockholders are entitled to receive in the Merger or the timing of the special meeting of the Company’s stockholders, scheduled for September6, 2017, to, among other things, consider and vote upon a proposal to approve the Merger Agreement.
SUPPLEMENT TO PROXY STATEMENT
In connection with the settlement of the shareholder suits as described in this Form8-K, the Company has agreed to make the following supplemental disclosures to the Proxy Statement. This supplemental information should be read in conjunction with the Proxy Statement, which should be read in its entirety. Defined terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Proxy Statement.
1. The section of the Proxy Statement titled “The Merger—Reasons for the Merger; Recommendation of the Board” is hereby supplemented by amending and restating the carryover bullet that begins at the bottom of page52 and ends at the top of page53 (such bullet beginning with “the fact that there were restrictions on the ability of Sycamore…”) to read as follows:
· the fact that Sycamore’s May22 non-binding proposal included the statement that: “Our strategy is to partner with management teams to build sustainable, long-term value. We pride ourselves on forming lasting partnerships with management and we have established a strong track record of partnering with teams to grow revenue and EBITDA.” While the Board and management, based on this stated strategy, assumed that Sycamore may seek to retain some or all of the Company’s management team post-closing, there were restrictions, prior to signing and closing the merger, on the ability of Sycamore and the Company’s management to enter into any discussions or arrangements regarding the terms of the Company’s management’s employment following the closing, including equity incentives, without the Board’s consent, and the Committee notified management of such restrictions in writing. No post-closing employment or compensation arrangements for the Company’s management have been