<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Diedrich&#8217;s odd disclosure&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.footnoted.com/urge-to-merge/diedrichs-odd-disclosure/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.footnoted.com/urge-to-merge/diedrichs-odd-disclosure/</link>
	<description>Morningstar&#039;s guide to what&#039;s hiding in SEC filings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:24:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Graham</title>
		<link>http://www.footnoted.com/urge-to-merge/diedrichs-odd-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-9946</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Graham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footnoted.com/?p=4360#comment-9946</guid>
		<description>Law Office of Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC Announces Investigation on Behalf of Shareholders of Diedrich Coffee, Inc.
2:07p ET November 3, 2009 (Business Wire) 
Law office of Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC announces that it is investigating potential claims against the Board of Directors of Diedrich Coffee, Inc. (&quot;Diedrich Coffee&quot; or the &quot;Company&quot;) (Nasdaq:DDRX) relating to the proposed acquisition by Peet&#039;s Coffee &amp; Tea, Inc. (&quot;Peet&#039;s&quot;). Peet&#039;s has agreed to acquire Diedrich Coffee in a deal valued at approximately $213 million. 

Under the proposed agreement, Diedrich Coffee shareholders will receive $17.33 in cash and a fraction of a Peet&#039;s share valued at about $8.67 for every share of Diedrich Coffee common stock they own. The investigation concerns possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law related to the Diedrich Coffee board&#039;s approval of the proposed merger. The transaction appears to be unfair, in part, given that Diedrich Coffee stock was trading at $29.88 a share as recently as October 22, 2009 and was trading at $25.39 a share on August 4, 2009. 

If you own shares of Diedrich Coffee and wish to discuss the legal ramifications of the proposed acquisition, or have any questions, you may e-mail or call the law office of Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC who will, without obligation or cost to you, attempt to answer your questions. You may contact Jason L. Brodsky, Esquire or Evan J. Smith, Esquire at Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC, Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by e-mail at clients@brodsky-smith.com, or by calling toll free 877-LEGAL-90. 

SOURCE: Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC 

 Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC 
Jason L. Brodsky, Esquire 
Evan J. Smith, Esquire 
877-LEGAL-90 
clients@brodsky-smith.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Law Office of Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC Announces Investigation on Behalf of Shareholders of Diedrich Coffee, Inc.<br />
2:07p ET November 3, 2009 (Business Wire)<br />
Law office of Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC announces that it is investigating potential claims against the Board of Directors of Diedrich Coffee, Inc. (&#8220;Diedrich Coffee&#8221; or the &#8220;Company&#8221;) (Nasdaq:DDRX) relating to the proposed acquisition by Peet&#8217;s Coffee &amp; Tea, Inc. (&#8220;Peet&#8217;s&#8221;). Peet&#8217;s has agreed to acquire Diedrich Coffee in a deal valued at approximately $213 million. </p>
<p>Under the proposed agreement, Diedrich Coffee shareholders will receive $17.33 in cash and a fraction of a Peet&#8217;s share valued at about $8.67 for every share of Diedrich Coffee common stock they own. The investigation concerns possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law related to the Diedrich Coffee board&#8217;s approval of the proposed merger. The transaction appears to be unfair, in part, given that Diedrich Coffee stock was trading at $29.88 a share as recently as October 22, 2009 and was trading at $25.39 a share on August 4, 2009. </p>
<p>If you own shares of Diedrich Coffee and wish to discuss the legal ramifications of the proposed acquisition, or have any questions, you may e-mail or call the law office of Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC who will, without obligation or cost to you, attempt to answer your questions. You may contact Jason L. Brodsky, Esquire or Evan J. Smith, Esquire at Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC, Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by e-mail at <a href="mailto:clients@brodsky-smith.com">clients@brodsky-smith.com</a>, or by calling toll free 877-LEGAL-90. </p>
<p>SOURCE: Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC </p>
<p> Brodsky &amp; Smith, LLC<br />
Jason L. Brodsky, Esquire<br />
Evan J. Smith, Esquire<br />
877-LEGAL-90<br />
<a href="mailto:clients@brodsky-smith.com">clients@brodsky-smith.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Graham</title>
		<link>http://www.footnoted.com/urge-to-merge/diedrichs-odd-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-9944</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Graham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:48:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footnoted.com/?p=4360#comment-9944</guid>
		<description>Could be a few more of those critical filings even using typo May 1, 2009.  Two 8-Ks.
July 28 and Oct. 27 2009.
One 10-Q mentions being &quot;vertically integrated, allowing us to control the quality of our product at all stages.&quot;  Casual reader might take that as a smokestack situation 
whereby PEET was only looking to be free-standing w/o being on hunt for acquistions which would be horizontal integration.
They do bother to mention having a Calif. management lawsuit about workers overtime  pay &amp; work issues.  But what amused me was the Cal earthquake loophole.
&quot;Because we have only one roasting facility, a significant interruption in the operation of our roasting and distribution facility could potentially disrupt our operations.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Could be a few more of those critical filings even using typo May 1, 2009.  Two 8-Ks.<br />
July 28 and Oct. 27 2009.<br />
One 10-Q mentions being &#8220;vertically integrated, allowing us to control the quality of our product at all stages.&#8221;  Casual reader might take that as a smokestack situation<br />
whereby PEET was only looking to be free-standing w/o being on hunt for acquistions which would be horizontal integration.<br />
They do bother to mention having a Calif. management lawsuit about workers overtime  pay &amp; work issues.  But what amused me was the Cal earthquake loophole.<br />
&#8220;Because we have only one roasting facility, a significant interruption in the operation of our roasting and distribution facility could potentially disrupt our operations.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michelle Leder</title>
		<link>http://www.footnoted.com/urge-to-merge/diedrichs-odd-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-9943</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle Leder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:38:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footnoted.com/?p=4360#comment-9943</guid>
		<description>Thanks, @eh for pointing out my mistake! As I say all the time, everyone needs an editor.  I mixed up effect and affect and have fixed the error. Thanks for being mine today!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, @eh for pointing out my mistake! As I say all the time, everyone needs an editor.  I mixed up effect and affect and have fixed the error. Thanks for being mine today!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eh</title>
		<link>http://www.footnoted.com/urge-to-merge/diedrichs-odd-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-9942</link>
		<dc:creator>eh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:21:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footnoted.com/?p=4360#comment-9942</guid>
		<description>went into effect

&lt;i&gt;We don’t mean to be sticklers here,...&lt;/i&gt; 

Yes you do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>went into effect</p>
<p><i>We don’t mean to be sticklers here,&#8230;</i> </p>
<p>Yes you do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

