o Preliminary Proxy Statement | ||
o Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) | ||
þ Definitive Proxy Statement | ||
o Definitive Additional Materials | ||
o Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12 |
þ | No fee required. |
o | Fee computed on table below per Exchange ActRules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11. |
(1) | Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: |
(2) | Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: |
(3) | Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (Set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): |
(4) | Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: |
o | Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. |
o | Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the form or schedule and the date of its filing. |
(1) | Amount previously paid: |
Ciena Corporation
NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
To the Shareholders of Ciena Corporation:
The 2006 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Ciena Corporation will be held at the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront Hotel located at 700 Aliceanna Street in Baltimore, Maryland, on Wednesday, March 15, 2006 at 3:00 p.m. local time for the following purposes:
1. To elect two members of the Board of Directors to serve as Class III directors for three-year terms ending in 2009, or until their respective successors are elected and qualified; | |
2. To authorize the Board of Directors, in its discretion, to amend Ciena’s Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation to effect a reverse stock split of its outstanding common stock at a ratio of (i) one-for-five, (ii) one-for-seven, or (iii) one-for-ten, together with a corresponding reduction in the number of authorized shares of Ciena common stock and capital stock, at any time prior to the date of Ciena’s 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, without further approval or authorization of Ciena’s shareholders; | |
3. To consider the ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Ciena’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending October 31, 2006; | |
4. To consider and act upon a shareholder proposal requesting the Board to adopt a majority vote standard for the election of directors, if properly presented at the Annual Meeting; and | |
5. To consider and act upon such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournments thereof. |
Please complete, sign, date and return the enclosed proxy card as promptly as possible in the postage paid envelope provided. Shareholders of record may also vote by telephone or Internet by following the instructions on the enclosed proxy card. If you elected to receive our Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Shareholders over the Internet, you will not receive a paper proxy card and you should vote online, unless you cancel your enrollment. If your shares are held in a bank or brokerage account, please refer to the materials provided by your bank or broker for voting instructions. If you choose to attend the Annual Meeting, you may still vote your shares in person even though you have previously returned your proxy by mail, telephone or Internet. Shareholders may listen to a webcast of the Annual Meeting by following the instructions that will be available on the Investor Relations page of our website atwww.ciena.com.
By Order of the Board of Directors, | |
Russell B. Stevenson, Jr. | |
Secretary |
Linthicum, Maryland
Section | Page | ||||
1 | |||||
4 | |||||
4 | |||||
5 | |||||
5 | |||||
5 | |||||
6 | |||||
7 | |||||
7 | |||||
7 | |||||
7 | |||||
8 | |||||
8 | |||||
8 | |||||
9 | |||||
11 | |||||
12 | |||||
12 | |||||
13 | |||||
14 | |||||
15 | |||||
15 | |||||
15 | |||||
15 | |||||
16 | |||||
16 | |||||
17 | |||||
17 | |||||
17 | |||||
18 | |||||
18 | |||||
19 | |||||
20 | |||||
20 | |||||
23 | |||||
25 | |||||
25 | |||||
26 | |||||
27 |
i
Section | Page | ||||
27 | |||||
28 | |||||
29 | |||||
35 | |||||
35 | |||||
37 | |||||
37 | |||||
38 | |||||
38 | |||||
38 | |||||
38 | |||||
39 | |||||
39 | |||||
A-1 | |||||
B-1 |
ii
• | held directly in your name with our transfer agent as a “shareholder of record”; and | |
• | held for you in an account with a broker, bank or other nominee (shares held in “street name”). |
• | are present and vote in person at the Annual Meeting; or | |
• | have properly submitted a proxy card prior to the Annual Meeting. |
• | the election of two Class III directors to the Board of Directors for three-year terms ending in 2009, or until their respective successors are elected and qualified; | |
• | the authorization of the Board of Directors, in its discretion, to effect the reverse stock split of its outstanding common stock at a ratio of (i) one-for-five, (ii) one-for-seven, or (iii) one-for-ten (the “reverse stock split”), together with a corresponding reduction in the number of authorized shares of Ciena common stock and capital stock (the “authorized stock reduction”), at any time prior to the |
date of Ciena’s 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, without further approval or authorization of Ciena’s shareholders; | ||
• | the ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending October 31, 2006; and | |
• | the consideration of a shareholder proposal requesting the Board of Directors to adopt a majority vote standard for the election of directors. |
• | “FOR” the director nominees named in this Proxy Statement; | |
• | “FOR” the authorization of the Board of Directors, in its discretion, to effect the reverse stock split and the corresponding authorized stock reduction, at any time prior to the date of Ciena’s 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, without further approval or authorization of Ciena’s shareholders; | |
• | “FOR” the ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm; and | |
• | “AGAINST” the shareholder proposal requesting that the Board of Directors adopt a majority vote standard for the election of directors. |
2
How are votes counted?
You may either vote “FOR” or “WITHHOLD” authority to vote for our director nominees. If you withhold authority to vote with respect to any nominee, your shares will be counted for purposes of establishing a quorum, but will have no effect on the election of that nominee.
You may vote “FOR,” “AGAINST” or “ABSTAIN” on the other proposals to be presented at the Annual Meeting and set forth in the Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders. If you abstain from voting on these proposals, your shares will be counted as present for purposes of establishing a quorum at the Annual Meeting. An abstention will have the same effect as a vote against the proposal to authorize the Board of Directors to effect the reverse stock split and corresponding authorized stock reduction. An abstention will not count as a vote for or against either the ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm or the shareholder proposal requesting the Board to adopt a majority vote standard for the election of directors.
Broker non-votes are counted as present for purposes of determining the presence or absence of a quorum for the transaction of business but will not be counted for purposes of determining whether a proposal has been approved. Broker non-votes occur when brokers do not receive voting instructions from their customers and the broker does not have discretionary voting authority with respect to a proposal. If you hold shares through a broker, bank or other nominee and you do not give instructions as to how to vote, your broker may have authority to vote your shares on certain routine items but not on other items. Broker non-votes will not be counted for purposes of the election of directors and will have no effect on the outcome of the vote for the ratification of our independent registered public accounting firm or the shareholder proposal requesting the Board to adopt a majority vote standard for the election of directors. Broker non-votes will have the effect of a vote against the proposal to authorize the Board of Directors to effect the reverse stock split and corresponding authorized stock reduction.
The persons named as proxies are officers of Ciena. All properly executed proxies returned in time to be counted at the Annual Meeting will be voted in accordance with the instructions contained therein. If you sign and submit your proxy card without voting instructions, your shares will be voted in accordance with the recommendations of the Board of Directors set forth above.
How do I vote my shares without attending the Annual Meeting?
Whether you are a “shareholder of record” or hold your shares in “street name,” you may direct your vote without attending the Annual Meeting in person. If you are a shareholder of record, you may vote by signing and dating your enclosed proxy card and mailing it in the postage-paid envelope provided. You should sign your name exactly as it appears on the proxy card. If you are signing in a representative capacity (for example, as guardian, executor, trustee, custodian, attorney or officer of a corporation), you should indicate your name and title or capacity. You may also vote by telephone or Internet by following the instructions on the enclosed proxy card.
If your shares are registered in the name of a bank or a brokerage firm, you may be eligible to vote your shares electronically over the Internet or by telephone. A large number of banks and brokerage firms participate in the ADP Investor Communications Services online program. This program provides eligible shareholders that hold shares in “street name” the opportunity to vote via the Internet or by telephone. If your bank or brokerage firm is participating in ADP’s program, your proxy materials will provide voting instructions. Eligible shareholders who elected to receive our Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Shareholders via the Internet will be receiving an e-mail on or about February 4, 2006 with information explaining how to access Annual Meeting materials and instructions for voting. If you provide specific voting instructions by mail, telephone or the Internet, your shares will be voted by your broker or nominee as you have directed.
3
• | submitting a properly signed proxy card with a later date; | |
• | delivering a written notice of revocation bearing a later date than your proxy card to Ciena Corporation, 1201 Winterson Road, Linthicum, Maryland 21090, Attention: Corporate Secretary; or | |
• | voting in person at the Annual Meeting. |
4
The following tables present information, including age, term of office and business experience, for each person nominated for election as a Ciena director and for those directors whose terms of office will continue after the meeting.
Director Nominees for Election to Class III with Terms Expiring in 2009
Stephen P. Bradley, Ph.D. | Director of Ciena since April 1998. Professor Bradley, age 64, is the William Ziegler Professor of Business Administration and teaches Competitive and Corporate Strategy in the Advanced Management Program at the Harvard Business School. A member of the Harvard faculty since 1968, Professor Bradley is also Chairman of Harvard’s Executive Program in Competition and Strategy: Building and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. Professor Bradley serves on the board of directors of the Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions and i2 Technologies, Inc. Professor Bradley serves on the Audit Committee and the Governance and Nominations Committee of the Ciena Board of Directors. | |
Gerald H. Taylor | Director of Ciena since January 2000. Mr. Taylor, age 64, has served as a Managing Member of mortonsgroup, LLC, a venture partnership specializing in telecommunications and information technology, since January 2000. From 1996 to 1998, Mr. Taylor was Chief Executive Officer of MCI Communications Corporation. Mr. Taylor serves on the board of directors of Lafarge North America Inc. Mr. Taylor serves on the Compensation Committee of the Ciena Board of Directors. |
Class III Director with Term Expiring in 2006
Don H. Davis, Jr. | Director of Ciena since March 2002. Mr. Davis, age 66, served as Chairman of the Board of Rockwell Automation, Inc. (formerly known as Rockwell International Corporation) from February 1998 until February 2005. Mr. Davis served as Chief Executive Officer of Rockwell Automation from October 1997 to February 2004, and as President and Chief Operating Officer from 1995 to 1997. Mr. Davis serves on the boards of Rockwell Automation, Illinois Tool Works Inc. and Journal Communications, Inc. Mr. Davis is also a past chairman of the Board of Governors of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Mr. Davis serves on the Compensation Committee of the Ciena Board of Directors. |
Class I Directors with Terms Expiring in 2007
Lawton W. Fitt | Director of Ciena since November 2000. Ms. Fitt, age 52, served as Director of the Royal Academy of Arts in London from October 2002 to March 2005. Ms. Fitt was an investment banker with Goldman Sachs & Co. from 1979 to October 2002, where she was a partner from 1994 and a managing director from 1996 to October 2002. Ms. Fitt is a trustee of the Darden School Foundation and a director of Reuters PLC and Citizens Communications Company. |
5
Ms. Fitt serves as Chairperson of the Audit Committee of the Ciena Board of Directors. | ||
Patrick H. Nettles, Ph.D. | Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors of Ciena since May 2001. Dr. Nettles, age 62, was Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Ciena from October 2000 to May 2001, and was President, Chief Executive Officer and Director from April 1994 to October 2000. Dr. Nettles serves as a Trustee for the California Institute of Technology. Dr. Nettles also serves on the board of directors of Axcelis Technologies, Inc. and The Progressive Corporation. Dr. Nettles also serves on the board of directors of Carrius Technologies, Inc., a privately held company. | |
Michael J. Rowny | Director of Ciena since August 2004. Mr. Rowny, age 55, has been Chairman of Rowny Capital, a private equity firm, since 1999. From 1994 to 1999, and previously from 1983 to 1986, Mr. Rowny was with MCI Communications in positions including President and Chief Executive Officer of MCI’s International Ventures, Alliances and Correspondent group, acting Chief Financial Officer, Senior Vice President of Finance, and Treasurer. Mr. Rowny serves on the board of directors of Llamagraphics, Inc. and is chairman of Step 9 Software Corporation. Mr. Rowny serves on the Audit Committee of the Ciena Board of Directors. |
Harvey B. Cash | Director of Ciena since April 1994. Mr. Cash, age 67, is a general partner of InterWest Partners, a venture capital firm in Menlo Park, California that he joined in 1985. Mr. Cash serves on the board of directors of First Acceptance Corp., i2 Technologies, Inc., Silicon Laboratories, Inc. and Staktek Holdings, Inc. Mr. Cash also serves on the board of directors of Voyence Inc., a privately held company. Mr. Cash serves on the Compensation Committee and as Chairperson of the Governance and Nominations Committee of the Ciena Board of Directors. Mr. Cash also serves as Ciena’s lead outside director. | |
Judith M. O’Brien | Director of Ciena since July 2000. Ms. O’Brien, age 55, has been a Managing Director at Incubic Venture Fund, a venture capital firm in Mountain View, California, since February 2001. From 1984 until 2001, Ms. O’Brien was a partner with Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, where she specialized in corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions and general corporate matters. Ms. O’Brien serves on the board of directors of Arcturus Bioscience, Inc., GeoVector Corporation, Grandis Inc., and Mistletoe Technologies, Inc., all of which are privately held companies. Ms. O’Brien serves on the Governance and Nominations Committee and as the Chairperson of the Compensation Committee of the Ciena Board of Directors. | |
Gary B. Smith | Director of Ciena since October 2000. Mr. Smith, age 45, has served as Ciena’s President and Chief Executive Officer since May 2001. Mr. Smith served as President and Chief Operating Officer from October 2000 to May 2001. Mr. Smith served as Ciena’s Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer from August 1999 to October 2000, as Senior Vice President, Worldwide Sales from |
6
September 1998 to August 1999, and was previously Vice President of International Sales since joining Ciena in November 1997. Mr. Smith currently serves on the board of directors for CommVault Systems, Inc., a privately held company, and the American Electronics Association. Mr. Smith also serves as a member of the Global Information Infrastructure Commission. |
Election of Directors and Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance
As noted above, Ciena’s directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast at the Annual Meeting. This means that the nominees who receive the largest number of “FOR” votes cast will be elected as directors.
Notwithstanding the plurality voting standard for election of directors, Section 16 of Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance, “Voting for Directors,” provides that any nominee, in an uncontested election, for whom a greater number of votes are “WITHHELD” than are cast “FOR” his or her election, will tender his or her resignation promptly after certification of the shareholder vote. The Governance and Nominations Committee would then consider the nominee’s resignation and make a recommendation to the Board on whether to accept or reject the resignation. In making its recommendation, the Governance and Nominations Committee will consider all factors it deems relevant, including the stated reasons shareholders withheld their votes, the length of service and qualifications of the director, the director’s contributions to Ciena and Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance. The Board of Directors is required to act on the Governance and Nominations Committee’s recommendation no later than 90 days following the date of the shareholders’ meeting. Promptly following the Board’s decision, Ciena will file a Form 8-K with the SEC disclosing the nature of the Board’s decision, providing an explanation of the process by which the decision was reached and, if applicable, the reasons for rejecting the director’s resignation. To the extent that one or more directors’ resignations are accepted by the Board, the Governance and Nominations Committee will recommend to the Board whether to fill such vacancy or vacancies or to reduce the size of the Board.
Any director who tenders his or her resignation pursuant to Section 16 of Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance will not participate in the recommendation of the Governance and Nominations Committee or the decision of the Board on the resignation. If a majority of the members of the Governance and Nominations Committee have been required to tender their resignations because of the application of this provision, then the remaining independent directors will appoint a special committee from among themselves for the purpose of considering the resignations and recommending whether to accept or reject them.
The Board’s decision to adopt Section 16 of Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance, “Voting for Directors,” and its relative merits in comparison to a majority voting standard in the election of directors, is discussed more fully under Proposal No. 4 below. Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance are available on the Corporate Governance page of Ciena’s website atwww.ciena.com.
Proposal No. 1 — Recommendation of the Board of Directors
The Board of Directors unanimously recommends that Ciena shareholders vote “FOR” the election of the nominees listed above.
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Independent Directors
The Board of Directors has determined that, with the exception of Dr. Nettles and Mr. Smith, both of whom are employees of Ciena, all of its members are “independent directors” as that term is defined in the listing standards of the Nasdaq Stock Market.
7
Communicating with the Board of Directors
The Board of Directors has adopted a procedure for receiving and addressing communications from shareholders. Shareholders may send written communications to the entire Board of Directors or to any of its committees, addressing them to Ciena Corporation, 1201 Winterson Road, Linthicum, Maryland 21090, Attention: Corporate Secretary. Communications by e-mail should be addressed toir@ciena.com and marked “Attention: Corporate Secretary” in the “Subject” field.
Codes of Ethics
Ciena has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that is applicable to all of its directors, officers and employees. The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics reflects Ciena’s policy of dealing with all persons, including its customers, employees, investors, and suppliers, with honesty and integrity. Ciena has also adopted a Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers that is specifically applicable to Ciena’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller. Its purpose is to promote honest and ethical conduct and compliance with the law, particularly as related to the maintenance of Ciena’s financial records and the preparation of financial statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Ciena’s Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers complies with the requirements of Section 406(c) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. A copy of Ciena’s Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics can each be found on the Corporate Governance page of our website atwww.ciena.com. You may also obtain copies of these documents without charge by writing to: Ciena Corporation, 1201 Winterson Road, Linthicum, Maryland 21090, Attention: Corporate Secretary.
Principles of Corporate Governance
Ciena has previously adopted Principles of Corporate Governance, setting forth the views of the Board of Directors on significant issues of corporate governance, including particularly the structure, interaction and operation of the Board of Directors. During 2005, the Board of Directors engaged in a comprehensive review of Ciena’s governance policies. In addition to the adoption of a new provision relating to voting for directors described in “Election of Directors and Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance” in Proposal No. 1 above, Ciena’s Board of Directors modified or added the provisions described below:
Selection of Board Members; Vacancies. For so long as the Board of Directors is classified, the Board shall endeavor, where reasonably practicable, to appoint nominees for vacancies or newly created directorships to the class of director that will stand for election at the next annual meeting of Ciena’s shareholders. If appointment to this class is not reasonably practicable, the Board will nominate the newly appointed director to stand for election at the next annual meeting of Ciena’s shareholders to serve in the class to which he or she was appointed, notwithstanding that other directors serving in that class are not required to stand for election. If the newly appointed director is nominated and fails to be elected at the next annual meeting of Ciena’s shareholders, he or she shall tender his or her resignation for consideration by the Board of Directors.
Service on Other Boards of Directors. Ciena’s Board of Directors believes that directors should not serve on more than four other boards of public companies in addition to Ciena’s Board of Directors. Ciena directors serving at the time of the adoption of this requirement may maintain directorships in excess of this limit unless the Board determines that doing so would impair the director’s service on Ciena’s Board of Directors. In the event that a director wishes to join the Board of another public company in excess of the limit above, the Board, in its sole discretion, shall determine whether service on the additional board of directors is likely to interfere with the performance of the director’s duties to Ciena, taking into account the individual, the nature of his or her other activities and such other factors or considerations as the Board of Directors deems relevant. In selecting nominees for membership, the Governance and Nominations Committee and the Board of Directors will take into account the other demands on the time of a candidate, and avoid candidates whose other responsibilities might interfere with effective service on Ciena’s Board of Directors.
Change in Principal Occupation of Director. In some cases, when a director changes his or her principal occupation, the change may result in an increased workload, actual or apparent conflicts of interest, or other consequences that may affect his or her ability to continue to serve on Ciena’s Board of Directors. As a result,
8
• | the Audit Committee, which held nine meetings during fiscal 2005; | |
• | the Compensation Committee, which held six meetings during fiscal 2005; and | |
• | the Governance and Nominations Committee, which held six meetings during fiscal 2005. |
Committee Composition |
Governance and | ||||||||||||
Audit | Compensation | Nominations | ||||||||||
Director Name | Committee | Committee | Committee | |||||||||
Stephen P. Bradley, Ph.D. | X | X | ||||||||||
Harvey B. Cash | X | Chairperson | ||||||||||
Don H. Davis, Jr. | X | |||||||||||
Lawton W. Fitt | Chairperson | |||||||||||
Judith M. O’Brien | Chairperson | X | ||||||||||
Michael J. Rowny | X | |||||||||||
Gerald H. Taylor | X |
Audit Committee |
9
Compensation Committee |
Governance and Nominations Committee |
10
Annual Retainer for Each Non-Employee Director | $ | 20,000 | ||||
Lead Outside Director Retainer | $ | 7,500 | ||||
Audit Committee Chairperson Retainer | $ | 7,500 | ||||
Board Meeting Attendance (excluding telephonic meetings) | $ | 1,500 | ||||
Audit Committee Meeting Attendance (in person) | $ | 3,000 | (Chairperson) | |||
$ | 2,000 | (other directors) | ||||
Other Committee Meeting Attendance (in person) | $ | 1,500 | (Chairperson) | |||
$ | 1,000 | (other directors) | ||||
All Committee Meeting Attendance (telephonic) | $ | 500 |
Stephen P. Bradley, Ph.D | $ | 37,500 | ||||
Harvey B. Cash | $ | 39,000 | ||||
Don H. Davis, Jr. | $ | 30,000 | ||||
Lawton W. Fitt | $ | 50,000 | ||||
Judith M. O’Brien | $ | 38,500 | ||||
Michael J. Rowny | $ | 32,500 | ||||
Gerald H. Taylor | $ | 31,500 |
11
Restricted Stock Unit Grant to Non-Employee Directors | 7,500 shares | |||
Stock Option Grant to Non-Employee Directors | 22,500 shares |
Reverse Split Ratio | Authorized Shares of Common Stock | Authorized Shares of Capital Stock | ||||||
1-for-5 | 196,000,000 | 216,000,000 | ||||||
1-for-7 | 140,000,000 | 160,000,000 | ||||||
1-for-10 | 98,000,000 | 118,000,000 |
12
• | existing and expected marketability and liquidity of Ciena’s common stock; | |
• | prevailing stock market conditions; | |
• | business developments affecting Ciena; | |
• | Ciena’s actual or forecasted results of operations; and | |
• | the likely effect on the market price of Ciena’s common stock. |
13
• | affect any shareholder’s percentage ownership interest in Ciena; | |
• | affect any shareholder’s proportionate voting power; | |
• | substantially affect the voting rights or other privileges of any shareholder, unless the shareholder holds fewer than five, seven or ten shares of Ciena common stock, in which case, depending upon the Approved Option, such shareholder would receive cash for all of his or her Ciena common stock held before the reverse stock split and would cease to be a Ciena shareholder following the reverse stock split; or | |
• | alter the relative rights of common shareholders, warrant holders or holders of equity compensation plan awards. |
• | the number of shares of common stock issued and outstanding will be reduced by a factor of five, seven or ten; | |
• | the per share exercise price will be increased by a factor of five, seven or ten, and the number of shares issuable upon exercise shall be decreased by the same factor, for all outstanding options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, performance share units, warrants and other convertible or exercisable equity instruments entitling the holders to purchase shares of Ciena common stock; | |
• | the number of shares authorized and reserved for issuance under Ciena’s existing equity compensation plans and employee stock purchase plan will be reduced proportionately; and | |
• | the conversion rate for holders of Ciena’s 3.75% convertible notes will be adjusted proportionately. |
Reverse Split Ratio | Authorized Shares of Common Stock | Authorized Shares of Capital Stock | ||||||
1-for-5 | 196,000,000 | 216,000,000 | ||||||
1-for-7 | 140,000,000 | 160,000,000 | ||||||
1-for-10 | 98,000,000 | 118,000,000 |
14
• | five shares, assuming a one-for-five reverse stock split; | |
• | seven shares, assuming a one-for-seven reverse stock split; and | |
• | ten shares, assuming a one-for-ten reverse stock split. |
15
• | Effecting the reverse stock split may not attract institutional or other potential investors, or result in a sustained market price that is high enough to overcome the investor policies and practices, and other issues relating to investing in lower priced stock described in “Purpose of the Reverse Stock Split” above. | |
• | The price per share of Ciena’s common stock after the reverse stock split may not reflect the Approved Option implemented by the Board and the price per share following the effective time of the reverse stock split may not be maintained for any period of time following the reverse stock split. For example, based on the closing price of Ciena’s common stock on January 20, 2006 of $3.50 per share, if the reverse stock split was implemented at an Approved Option of1-for-10, there can be no assurance that the post-split trading price of Ciena’s common stock would be $35.00, or even that it would remain above the pre-split trading price. Accordingly, the total market capitalization of Ciena’s common stock following a reverse stock split may be lower than before the reverse stock split. | |
• | The trading liquidity of Ciena’s common stock could be adversely affected by the reduced number of shares outstanding after a reverse stock split. |
1. Ciena believes that the reverse stock split will be a tax-free recapitalization. Accordingly, except with respect to any cash received in lieu of fractional shares, a shareholder will not recognize any gain or loss as a result of the receipt of the post-reverse split common stock pursuant to the reverse stock split. | |
2. The shares of post-reverse split common stock in the hands of a shareholder will have an aggregate basis for computing gain or loss equal to the aggregate basis of shares of pre-reverse split common stock held by that shareholder immediately prior to the reverse stock split, reduced by the basis allocable to any fractional shares which the shareholder is treated as having sold for cash, as discussed in paragraph 4 below. | |
3. A shareholder’s holding period for the post-reverse split common stock will include the holding period of the pre-reverse split common stock exchanged. | |
4. Shareholders who receive cash for all of their holdings (as a result of owning fewer than five, seven or ten shares, depending on the Approved Option selected by the Board of Directors) and who are not related to any person or entity that holds common stock immediately after the reverse stock split, will recognize a gain or loss for federal income tax purposes equal to the difference between the cash received and their basis in the pre-reverse split common stock. Such gain or loss will generally be a capital gain or |
16
loss if the stock was held as a capital asset, and such capital gain or loss will be a long-term gain or loss to the extent that the shareholder’s holding period exceeds 12 months. Although the tax consequences to other shareholders who receive cash for fractional shares are not entirely certain, these shareholders likely will be treated for federal income tax purposes as having sold their fractional shares and will recognize gain or loss in an amount equal to the difference between the cash received and the portion of their basis for the pre-reverse split common stock allocated to the fractional shares. It is possible that such shareholders will be treated as receiving dividend income to the extent of their ratable share of our current and accumulated earnings and profits (if any) and then a tax-free return of capital to the extent of their aggregate adjusted tax basis in our shares, with any remaining amount being treated as capital gain. Shareholders who continue to hold our common stock immediately after the reverse stock split and who do not receive any cash for their holdings should not recognize any gain or loss for federal income tax purposes as a result of the reverse stock split. | |
5. Shareholders will be required to provide their social security or other taxpayer identification numbers (or, in some instances, additional information) in connection with the reverse stock split to avoid backup withholding requirements that might otherwise apply. Failure to provide such information may result in backup withholding at a rate of 28%. |
Board Discretion to Implement the Reverse Stock Split and Authorized Stock Reduction
If Proposal No. 2 is approved by shareholders, the reverse stock split will be effected, if at all, only upon a determination by the Board of Directors that a reverse stock split is in the best interests of Ciena and its shareholders. The Board’s determination as to whether the reverse stock split will be effected and, if so, at which Approved Option, will be based upon certain factors, including existing and expected marketability and liquidity of Ciena’s common stock, prevailing stock market conditions, business developments affecting Ciena, actual or forecasted results of operations and the likely effect on the market price of Ciena’s common stock.
If the Board of Directors determines to implement the reverse stock split, Ciena intends to issue a press release announcing the Approved Option, the record date and the effective date of the reverse stock split before it files the Amendment with the Delaware Secretary of State. If the Board does not implement a reverse stock split and corresponding authorized stock reduction prior to the date of the 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, the authorization granted by shareholders pursuant to this Proposal No. 2 would be deemed abandoned and without any further effect. In that case, the Board of Directors may again seek shareholder approval at a future date for a reverse stock split if it deems it to be advisable.
Proposal No. 2 — Recommendation of the Board of Directors
The Board of Directors unanimously recommends that Ciena shareholders vote “FOR” the authorization of the Board of Directors, in its discretion, to amend Ciena’s Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation to effect the reverse stock split and the authorized stock reduction in accordance with this Proposal No. 2, at any time prior to the date of Ciena’s 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, without further approval or authorization of Ciena’s shareholders.
PROPOSAL NO. 3
RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors has appointed the firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) as our independent registered public accounting firm to audit Ciena’s consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ending October 31, 2006, and is asking shareholders to ratify this appointment at the Annual Meeting.
PwC has audited our consolidated financial statements annually since Ciena’s incorporation in 1992. A representative of PwC is expected to be present at the Annual Meeting, will have the opportunity to make a statement if he or she desires to do so and will be available to respond to appropriate questions. In making its
17
Our bylaws do not require that shareholders ratify the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm. We are seeking ratification because we believe it is a matter of good corporate governance practice. In the event that shareholders fail to ratify the appointment, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to retain PwC, but may ultimately determine to retain PwC as our independent registered public accounting firm. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its sole discretion, may direct the appointment of a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if the Audit Committee determines that such a change would be in the best interests of Ciena and its shareholders.
Proposal No. 3 — Recommendation of the Board of Directors
The Board of Directors unanimously recommends that Ciena shareholders vote “FOR” the ratification of the appointment of PwC as our independent registered public accounting firm for the current fiscal year.
RELATIONSHIP WITH INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The following table shows the fees that were billed to Ciena by PwC for professional services rendered for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2004 and 2005. In compliance with the Audit Committee’s internal policy and auditor independence rules of the SEC, all audit and permissible non-audit services provided by PwC to Ciena for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2004 and 2005 were pre-approved by the Audit Committee.
Fee Category | 2004 | 2005 | |||||||
Audit Fees | $ | 617,000 | $ | 2,014,000 | |||||
Audit-Related Fees | $ | 141,000 | $ | — | |||||
Tax Fees | $ | 280,000 | $ | 91,000 | |||||
All Other Fees | $ | 104,000 | $ | — | |||||
Total Fees | $ | 1,142,000 | $ | 2,105,000 |
Audit Fees
This category of the table above includes fees for the audit of our annual financial statements, review of financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and services that are normally provided by PwC in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements. The preparation of Ciena’s audited financial statements for the year ended October 31, 2005 included, for the first time, compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the preparation, by PwC, of an attestation report expressing its opinion regarding management’s assessment of our internal control over financial reporting and on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. As a result, audit fees for fiscal 2005 reflect PwC’s integrated audit of our financial statements and our internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2005.
Audit-Related Fees
This category of the table above includes fees for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our financial statements and are not included above under “Audit Fees.” These services for fiscal 2004 included accounting advice and audit services in connection with acquisitions. Ciena did not incur any audit related fees during fiscal 2005.
18
Tax Fees
This category of the table above includes fees for tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning. These services for fiscal 2004 and fiscal 2005 include tax return preparation, expatriate tax services and international VAT tax planning.
All Other Fees
This category of the table above includes fees for products and services provided by PwC that are not included in the services reported above. These services for fiscal 2004 include consulting services and Sarbanes-Oxley Act related services in connection with our preparation for compliance with Section 404. Because Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act was effective for our fiscal 2005 audit, fees incurred during fiscal 2005 related to compliance with Section 404 are included under “Audit Fees.”
Pre-Approval of Services
The Audit Committee pre-approves all services, including both audit and non-audit services, provided by our independent registered public accounting firm. For audit services (including statutory audit engagements as required under local country laws), each year our independent registered public accounting firm provides the Audit Committee with an engagement letter outlining the scope of the audit services proposed to be performed during the year, which must be formally accepted by the Audit Committee before the audit commences. Our independent registered public accounting firm also submits an audit services fee proposal, which also must be approved by the Audit Committee before the audit commences.
Each year, management also submits to the Audit Committee a list of non-audit services that it recommends the independent registered public accounting firm be engaged to provide and an estimate of the fees to be paid for each. Management and the independent registered public accounting firm must each confirm to the Audit Committee that the performance of the non-audit services on the list would not compromise the independence of our registered public accounting firm and would be permissible under all applicable legal requirements. The Audit Committee must approve both the list of non-audit services and the budget for each such service before commencement of the work. Our management and our independent registered public accounting firm report to the Audit Committee at each of its regular meetings as to the non-audit services actually provided by the independent registered public accounting firm and the approximate fees incurred by Ciena for those services.
To ensure prompt handling of unexpected matters, the Audit Committee has authorized its Chairperson to amend or modify the list of approved permissible non-audit services and fees. If the Chairperson exercises this delegation of authority, she reports the action taken to the Audit Committee at its next regular meeting.
All audit and permissible non-audit services provided by PwC to Ciena for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2004 and 2005 were pre-approved by the Audit Committee.
PROPOSAL NO. 4
SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL REQUESTING THE BOARD TO ADOPT
A shareholder of Ciena, The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, 101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001, which claims to be the beneficial owner of 9,200 shares of Ciena stock, has notified Ciena of its intention to propose the following item of business at the Annual Meeting. The SEC’s proxy regulations require Ciena to present the proposal and the supporting statement below, although Ciena has no responsibility for either. Following the shareholder’s proposal and supporting statement is the response of our Board of Directors. While the shareholder recommends that you vote “FOR” its proposal, our Board of Directors unanimously recommends you vote “AGAINST” this proposal.
19
Shareholder Proposal and Supporting Statement
Resolved: That the shareholders of Ciena Corporation (“Company”) hereby request that the Board of Directors initiate the appropriate process to amend the Company’s governance documents (certificate of incorporation or bylaws) to provide that director nominees shall be elected by the affirmative vote of the majority of votes cast at an annual meeting of shareholders.
Supporting Statement: Our Company is incorporated in Delaware. Delaware law provides that a company’s certificate of incorporation or bylaws may specify the number of votes that shall be necessary for the transaction of any business, including the election of directors. (DCGL, Title 8, Chapter 1, Subchapter VII, Section 216). The law provides that if the level of voting support necessary for a specific action is not specified in a corporation’s certificate or bylaws, directors “shall be elected by a plurality of the votes of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote on the election of directors.”
Our Company presently uses the plurality vote standard to elect directors. This proposal requests that the Board initiate a change in the Company’s director election vote standard to provide that nominees for the board of directors must receive a majority of the vote cast in order to be elected or re-elected to the Board.
We believe that a majority vote standard in director elections would give shareholders a meaningful role in the director election process. Under the Company’s current standard, a nominee in a director election can be elected with as little as a single affirmative vote, even if a substantial majority of the votes cast are “withheld” from that nominee. The majority vote standard would require that a director receive a majority of the vote cast in order to be elected to the Board.
The majority vote proposal received high levels of support last year, winning majority support at Advanced Micro Devices, Freeport McMoran, Marathon Oil, Marsh and McClennan, Office Depot, Raytheon, and others. Leading proxy advisory firms recommended voting in favor of the proposal.
Some companies have adopted board governance policies requiring director nominees that fail to receive majority support from shareholders to tender their resignations to the board. We believe that these policies are inadequate for they are based on continued use of the plurality standard and would allow director nominees to be elected despite only minimal shareholder support. We contend that changing the legal standard to a majority vote is a superior solution that merits shareholder support.
Our proposal is not intended to limit the judgment of the Board in crafting the requested governance change. For instance, the Board should address the status of incumbent director nominees who fail to receive a majority vote under a majority vote standard and whether a plurality vote standard may be appropriate in director elections when the number of director nominees exceeds the available board seats.
We urge your support for this important director election reform.
Statement of the Board of Directors in Opposition to the Proposal
The Board of Directors of Ciena is committed to strong corporate governance policies and, as described elsewhere in this Proxy Statement, has implemented a number of modifications and proposals to strengthen our policies this year. The Board has always believed that shareholders should actively participate and play a meaningful role in the election of directors. While the Board is sensitive to the concerns underlying the shareholder’s proposal, the Board believes that implementation of a majority vote standard as proposed by the shareholder would result in ambiguity and uncertainty in the conduct of elections to the Board. The Board believes that the revision it has recently made to Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance better achieves the goal of giving greater weight to the withholding of shareholder votes for a nominee.
The shareholder’s proposal does not adequately address what would occur under the provisions of Delaware corporation law governing elections of directors if a nominee fails to receive the requisite vote under a majority vote standard. Delaware law provides that directors hold office until their successors are duly elected and qualified. As a result, an incumbent director running unopposed for election, who fails to attain a majority vote, would nonetheless remain in office. Such a “failed election” would result in an awkward
20
The majority vote standard proposed by the shareholder also could have other unintended consequences. For example, if it resulted in a failure to elect a candidate nominated to serve as the “financial expert” on the Audit Committee, the Company could find itself in violation of Nasdaq’s listing standards.
The application of a shareholder’s majority vote standard could present particular difficulties in a contested election. It could lead to a failed election simply because the votes were spread so that no nominee received a majority of the votes cast. In a failed contested election, the incumbent, holdover director would remain in office, notwithstanding the voting results and whether or not the incumbent was the nominee for re-election or was the nominee who received the most votes. In the event of a failed election to fill a vacancy or new board seat, Delaware law and Ciena’s bylaws would provide for the remaining directors to fill this vacancy. The application of a majority vote standard to these situations would not strengthen the voice of shareholders in director elections.
At the time it received the shareholder’s proposal, the Board of Directors was engaged in a comprehensive review of Ciena’s governance policies; and the Board considered the proposal as part of that review. After thorough deliberation, the Board determined that it would be better to address the concerns underlying the proposal by amending Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance to provide that, in an uncontested election for the Board, a nominee for whom a greater number of votes are “withheld” than are cast for his or her election must promptly tender his or her resignation. The Board, with the recommendation of its Governance and Nominations Committee, must either accept or reject the resignation within 90 days following the shareholder meeting. The determination of the Board, including an explanation of how the decision was reached, would then be publicly disclosed in an SEC filing. This new provision of our Principles of Corporate Governance, which is similar to those recently adopted by several other public companies, is set forth in its entirety below:
16. | Voting for Directors. In an uncontested election of directors (i.e., an election in which the only nominees are those recommended by the Board of Directors), any nominee for director for whom a greater number of votes are “withheld” than are cast for his or her election will tender his or her resignation promptly after certification of the shareholder vote. The Governance and Nominations Committee will promptly consider the resignation and recommend to the Board whether to accept or reject it. In making its recommendation, the Governance and Nominations Committee will consider all factors it considers relevant, including the stated reasons shareholders “withheld” their votes, the length of service and qualifications of the director, the director’s contributions to the Company, and the Company’s Principles of Corporate Governance. |
The Board will act on the Governance and Nominations Committee’s recommendation no later than 90 days following the date of the shareholders’ meeting. Promptly following the Board’s decision, the Company will disclose the nature of the decision, providing a full explanation of the process by which the decision was reached and, if applicable, the reasons for rejecting the resignation, in a Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. | |
To the extent that one or more directors’ resignations are accepted by the Board, the Governance and Nominations Committee will recommend to the Board whether to fill such vacancy or vacancies or to reduce the size of the Board. | |
Any director who tenders his or her resignation pursuant to this provision will not participate in the Governance and Nominations Committee’s recommendation or the Board’s decision on the resignation. If a majority of the members of the Governance and Nominations Committee have been required to tender their resignations because of this provision, then the remaining independent |
21
directors will appoint a special committee from among themselves for the purpose of considering the resignations and recommending whether to accept or reject them. | |
This corporate governance guideline will be summarized or included in each proxy statement relating to an election of directors of the Company. |
The shareholder suggests that governance guidelines of this type are “inadequate for they are based on continued use of the plurality standard and would allow director nominees to be elected despite only minimal support.” In the past five years, our directors have, on average, received the affirmative vote of approximately 95% of the shares voted through the plurality process; none has received less than 87.6% of the vote. It can hardly be said, therefore, that Ciena’s directors have been “elected despite only minimal support.”
The shareholder also proposes that the Board should address this issue by amending the certificate of incorporation or bylaws. The Board believes that law and practice in this area are evolving and that it would be premature for the Board to introduce an alternative system beyond that set forth in the Principles of Corporate Governance until the issues associated with failed elections and the application of a majority vote standard have been further clarified.
For the reasons above, the Board believes that its revision to Ciena’s Principles of Corporate Governance provides shareholders with a greater voice in the election of directors and a better structure for director accountability than the majority vote proposal.
The Board believes that the adoption of the shareholder’s proposal would not be in the best interests of Ciena and its shareholders and unanimously recommends that you vote AGAINST the proposal.
22
OWNERSHIP OF SECURITIES
The following table sets forth, as of December 31, 2005, the beneficial ownership of Ciena’s common stock for the following persons:
• | all shareholders known by us to beneficially own more than 5% of our common stock; | |
• | our Chief Executive Officer and the other Named Executive Officers (as that term is defined in the Summary Compensation Table included in this Proxy Statement); | |
• | each of our directors; and | |
• | all of our directors and executive officers as a group. |
Certain information in the table concerning beneficial owners other than our directors and executive officers is based on information contained in filings made by such beneficial owners with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Pursuant to Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, shares are deemed to be beneficially owned by a person if that person has the right to acquire shares (for example, upon exercise of an option) within sixty days of the date that information is provided. In computing the percentage ownership of any person, the amount of shares outstanding is deemed to include the amount of shares beneficially owned by such person (and only such person) by reason of such acquisition rights. As a result, the percentage of outstanding shares held by any person in the table below does not necessarily reflect the person’s actual voting power. As of December 31, 2005, there were 580,879,132 shares of Ciena common stock outstanding.
Number | Beneficial | Percent of | ||||||||||||||
of Shares | Right to | Ownership | Outstanding | |||||||||||||
Name of Beneficial Owner | Owned(1) | Acquire(2) | Total(3) | Shares | ||||||||||||
FMR Corp.(4) | 68,529,939 | 522,824 | 69,052,763 | 11.9 | % | |||||||||||
Patrick H. Nettles, Ph.D. | 2,446,761 | 2,982,800 | 5,429,561 | * | ||||||||||||
Gary B. Smith | 38,073 | 2,952,737 | 2,990,810 | * | ||||||||||||
Stephen B. Alexander | 130,116 | (5) | 1,259,942 | 1,390,058 | * | |||||||||||
Joseph R. Chinnici | 276,052 | 1,096,097 | 1,372,149 | * | ||||||||||||
James F. Collier III | 4,666 | 768,438 | 773,104 | * | ||||||||||||
Stephen P. Bradley, Ph.D. | 40,000 | 310,500 | 350,500 | * | ||||||||||||
Harvey B. Cash(6) | 378,898 | 200,500 | 579,398 | * | ||||||||||||
Don H. Davis, Jr. | 10,000 | 120,000 | 130,000 | * | ||||||||||||
Lawton W. Fitt | — | 218,866 | 218,866 | * | ||||||||||||
Judith M. O’Brien | 29,349 | (7) | 215,466 | 244,815 | * | |||||||||||
Michael J. Rowny | — | 20,000 | 20,000 | * | ||||||||||||
Gerald H. Taylor | 2,000 | 208,532 | 210,532 | * | ||||||||||||
All executive officers and directors as a group (15 persons) | 3,381,185 | 12,492,212 | 15,873,397 | 2.7 | % |
* | Represents less than 1%. |
(1) | Excludes shares that may be acquired through the exercise of stock options, the vesting of restricted stock units or other convertible or exercisable rights. |
(2) | Except as otherwise set forth in the footnotes below, represents shares of common stock that can be acquired upon the exercise of stock options or vesting of restricted stock units within sixty days of December 31, 2005. |
(3) | The persons named in this table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common stock shown as beneficially owned by them, subject to community property laws where applicable and except as indicated in the other footnotes to this table. |
23
(4) | This shareholder’s address is 82 Devonshire Street, Boston, MA 02109. The information concerning this shareholder is based solely on a Schedule 13G/ A, filed jointly by FMR Corp. (“FMR”), Edward C. Johnson 3d and Abigail P. Johnson with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 14, 2005, and reflects their beneficial ownership at December 31, 2004. Based on the Schedule 13G/ A, FMR is the parent holding company of Fidelity Management & Research Company (“Fidelity”). By acting as investment adviser to various investment companies, Fidelity is the beneficial owner of 57,139,943 shares of Ciena’s common stock, or 9.8% of the outstanding shares of Ciena common stock at December 31, 2005. Shares included in the “Right to Acquire” column above reflect shares of common stock exercisable upon conversion of Ciena’s 3.75% convertible notes held by Fidelity and another subsidiary of FMR. These notes are convertible at the option of the holder into 9.5808 shares of common stock for each $1,000 in principal amount. |
(5) | Voting and investment power is shared with Mr. Alexander’s spouse. |
(6) | Includes 221,486 shares of common stock owned by InterWest Partners VI, L.P. and 7,022 shares owned by InterWest Investors VI, L.P., which Mr. Cash may be deemed to beneficially own by virtue of his status as a Managing Director of InterWest Management Partners VI, LLC, which is the general partner of each limited partnership. Mr. Cash disclaims beneficial ownership of these shares except to the extent of his proportionate partnership interest therein. Also includes 145,000 shares owned by the Harvey B. Cash self-directed IRA, 2,691 shares owned by InterWest Management Profit Sharing Retirement Plan FBO Harvey B. Cash and direct ownership of 2,699 shares. |
(7) | Voting and investment power is shared with Ms. O’Brien’s spouse. |
24
Long Term Compensation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Awards | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Annual Compensation (4) | Restricted | Securities | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock Unit | Underlying | All Other | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Name and Principal Position | Year | Salary | Bonus | Award(s)(1) | Options | Compensation(3) | ||||||||||||||||||
Patrick H. Nettles, Ph.D. | 2005 | $ | 300,000 | $ | — | $ | — | — | $ | 11,701 | ||||||||||||||
Executive Chairman of | 2004 | 300,000 | — | — | 300,000 | 12,012 | ||||||||||||||||||
the Board of Directors | 2003 | 300,000 | — | — | 450,000 | 17,785 | ||||||||||||||||||
Gary B. Smith | 2005 | $ | 528,846 | $ | — | $ | — | 700,000 | $ | 6,737 | ||||||||||||||
President, Chief Executive | 2004 | 650,000 | — | 405,600 | 230,000 | 6,662 | ||||||||||||||||||
Officer and Director | 2003 | 650,000 | — | — | 700,000 | 6,002 | ||||||||||||||||||
Stephen B. Alexander | 2005 | $ | 300,000 | $ | — | $ | — | 250,000 | $ | 3,438 | ||||||||||||||
Senior Vice President, | 2004 | 300,000 | — | 94,640 | 55,000 | 3,342 | ||||||||||||||||||
Products and Technology | 2003 | 300,000 | — | — | 300,000 | 1,110 | ||||||||||||||||||
Chief Technology Officer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseph R. Chinnici | 2005 | $ | 350,000 | $ | — | $ | — | 250,000 | $ | 7,538 | ||||||||||||||
Senior Vice President, | 2004 | 350,000 | — | 94,640 | 55,000 | 9,463 | ||||||||||||||||||
Finance and Chief | 2003 | 350,000 | — | — | 300,000 | 10,770 | ||||||||||||||||||
Financial Officer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
James F. Collier III | 2005 | $ | 300,000 | $ | 200,012 | $ | — | 250,000 | $ | 4,519 | ||||||||||||||
Senior Vice President, | 2004 | 298,558 | 125,000 | 166,240 | (2) | 455,000 | 4,447 | |||||||||||||||||
Worldwide Sales | 2003 | 210,975 | 116,847 | — | 90,000 | 1,416 |
(1) | Restricted stock units were granted in the following amounts on December 9, 2003: (a) 60,000 restricted stock units to Mr. Smith, and (b) 14,000 restricted stock units to each of Messrs. Chinnici, Collier and Alexander. One third of the total number of restricted stock units granted became vested on December 9, 2005. An additional one third of the total grant amount will vest on December 9, 2006 and 2007, provided the recipient remains employed by Ciena. All of the unvested restricted stock units vest upon a termination of service due to death or disability. Based upon the $2.37 closing price per share of Ciena common stock on October 28, 2005, at the end of fiscal 2005: (a) the 40,000 restricted stock units that remained held by Mr. Smith had a dollar value of $94,800, and (b) the 9,334 restricted stock units held by each of Messrs. Chinnici, Collier and Alexander, had a dollar value of $22,122. |
(2) | In addition to the restricted stock units granted to Mr. Collier described in footnote (1), the amount set forth for Mr. Collier reflects the grant of 20,000 additional restricted stock units on May 18, 2004, valued at $71,600 based upon the $3.58 closing price per share of Ciena common stock on the date of the grant. These restricted stock units contained certain performance-based vesting terms. As a result of these terms, the 20,000 restricted stock units subject to this grant have been forfeited and therefore had no dollar value at the end of fiscal 2005. |
25
(3) | Includes the following for fiscal 2005: |
(a) | life insurance premiums, paid by Ciena on behalf of all employees, in the amount of $714 for each of the Named Executive Officers, for group term life insurance coverage equal to two times annual salary and bonus, up to a maximum of $500,000; | |
(b) | additional life insurance premium of $199 for Mr. Smith pursuant to a supplemental term life insurance policy that offers $235,000 in additional coverage above the limitation in footnote (a); | |
(c) | long-term disability premiums, paid by Ciena on behalf of all employees, in the amount of $570 for Dr. Nettles, $855 for Mr. Smith, $570 for Mr. Alexander, $665 for Mr. Chinnici and $482 for Mr. Collier; | |
(d) | supplemental long-term disability premiums of $6,921 for Dr. Nettles, $1,819 for Mr. Smith, and $3,084 for Mr. Chinnici, paid by Ciena on their respective behalf, pursuant to executive long-term disability insurance policies held by those individuals; and | |
(e) | 401(k) plan matching contributions, available to all employees, paid by Ciena in the amount of $3,496 to Dr. Nettles, $3,150 to Mr. Smith, $2,154 to Mr. Alexander, $3,075 to Mr. Chinnici and $3,323 to Mr. Collier. |
(4) | Salary information includes a compensation deferral of $10,000 by Mr. Smith in fiscal 2005. During fiscal 2005, Ciena’s Board of Directors terminated the deferred compensation plan and distributed all amounts previously deferred. |
Option Grants in Last Fiscal Year
The following table provides the specified information concerning options granted to the Named Executive Officers for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005:
Individual Grants | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percentage | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
of Total | Potential Realizable Value at | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Number of | Options | Assumed Annual Rates of | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities | Granted to | Stock Price Appreciation for | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Underlying | Employees | Exercise | Option Term(4) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Options | in Fiscal | Price Per | Expiration | |||||||||||||||||||||
Granted | 2005 | Share(3) | Date | 5% | 10% | |||||||||||||||||||
Patrick H. Nettles, Ph.D. | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Gary B. Smith | 350,000 | (1) | 2.45 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 627,322 | $ | 1,589,758 | |||||||||||||
350,000 | (2) | 2.45 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 627,322 | $ | 1,589,758 | ||||||||||||||
Stephen B. Alexander | 125,000 | (1) | 0.87 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 224,044 | $ | 567,771 | |||||||||||||
125,000 | (2) | 0.87 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 224,044 | $ | 567,771 | ||||||||||||||
Joseph R. Chinnici | 125,000 | (1) | 0.87 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 224,044 | $ | 567,771 | |||||||||||||
125,000 | (2) | 0.87 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 224,044 | $ | 567,771 | ||||||||||||||
James F. Collier III | 125,000 | (1) | 0.87 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 224,044 | $ | 567,771 | |||||||||||||
125,000 | (2) | 0.87 | % | $ | 2.85 | 12/10/2014 | $ | 224,044 | $ | 567,771 |
(1) | Options granted on December 10, 2004 were initially to vest and become exercisable as to 25% of the total grant on the last day of the month in which the first anniversary of the grant occurs, and 2.084% per month thereafter. As described in the “Aggregated Option Exercises in Last Fiscal Year and Fiscal Year-End Option Values” table below, the vesting of these options and other “out-of-the-money” options held by employees was accelerated as of October 26, 2005. |
(2) | Options granted on December 10, 2004 vest and become fully exercisable on the last day of the month following two consecutive quarters of achievement by Ciena of certain financial performance measures. If these goals are not met by the end of fiscal 2006, the options will not vest. These options were not subject to the October 26, 2005 acceleration of vesting. |
(3) | Options were granted at exercise prices equal to the fair market value of Ciena’s common stock based on the closing price on the Nasdaq National Market on the date of grant. Upon exercise, the aggregate exercise price is to be paid to Ciena in cash. |
26
(4) | The dollar amounts set forth under these columns are the result of calculations of assumed annual rates of stock price appreciation of 5% and 10% from the date of grant to the date of expiration of such options. These assumptions are not intended to forecast future appreciation of Ciena’s stock price. Ciena’s stock price may increase or decrease in value over the time period set forth above. |
Number of Securities | Value of Unexercised | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Underlying Unexercised | in-the-Money Options at | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares | Options at 10/31/2005 | 10/31/2005 (2) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquired | Value | |||||||||||||||||||||||
on Exercise | Realized(1) | Exercisable | Unexercisable | Exercisable | Unexercisable | |||||||||||||||||||
Patrick H. Nettles, Ph.D. | — | — | 2,982,800 | — | $ | 2,135,000 | — | |||||||||||||||||
Gary B. Smith | — | — | 2,869,924 | 350,000 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Stephen B. Alexander | — | — | 1,227,650 | 125,000 | $ | 58,621 | — | |||||||||||||||||
Joseph R. Chinnici | 200,000 | $ | 429,000 | 1,069,014 | 125,000 | $ | 73,705 | — | ||||||||||||||||
James F. Collier III | — | — | 745,000 | 125,000 | — | — |
(1) | Calculated on the basis of the fair market value of the shares acquired on the exercise date, less the aggregate exercise price. |
(2) | Calculated on the basis of the fair market value of the underlying common stock as of the end of fiscal 2005, based upon the $2.37 closing price per share of Ciena common stock on October 28, 2005, less the aggregate exercise price. |
(A) | (C) | |||||||||||
Number of securities to be | (B) | Number of securities remaining | ||||||||||
issued upon exercise of | Weighted-average exercise | available for future issuance under | ||||||||||
outstanding options, | price of outstanding | equity compensation plans (excluding | ||||||||||
Plan category | warrants and rights | options, warrants and rights | securities reflected in Column (A)) | |||||||||
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders(1) | 21,545,190 | $ | 7.22 | 65,494,051 | (2)(3) | |||||||
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders(4) | 39,045,656 | $ | 5.95 | — | (5) | |||||||
Total | 60,590,846 | $ | 6.40 | 65,494,051 |
27
(1) | Consists of the following equity compensation plans: |
• | 1994 Third Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan; | |
• | 1996 Outside Directors Stock Option Plan; | |
• | 2000 Plan; | |
• | ESPP; and | |
• | equity compensation plans assumed by Ciena in connection with its merger with ONI Systems Corp. (“ONI”), including, the ONI 1999 Equity Incentive Plan, the ONI 1998 Equity Incentive Plan and the ONI 1997 Stock Option Plan (“ONI Plans”). |
(2) | Consists of shares remaining available for future issuance under the 2000 Plan and the ESPP. The 2000 Plan incorporates an evergreen provision pursuant to which, on January 1 of each year, the aggregate number of shares reserved for issuance under the 2000 Plan automatically increases by 5% of the total number of shares of Ciena’s common stock outstanding on December 31 of the preceding year, unless the Compensation Committee determines to reduce the increase in that year. The Compensation Committee determined not to increase the number of shares available under the 2000 Plan at January 1, 2005 and 2006. On March 16, 2005, Ciena shareholders approved an amendment to the ESPP pursuant to which 11.8 million shares were added to the ESPP on March 16, 2005, increasing the number of shares available under the ESPP to 25 million. The amendment to the ESPP also provided for an “evergreen” provision, pursuant to which, beginning on December 31, 2005, the number of shares available for issuance under the ESPP annually increases by up to four million shares, provided that the total number of shares available for issuance at any time under the ESPP shall not exceed 25 million. On December 31, 2005, the evergreen provision automatically added an additional 2.1 million shares to the ESPP (not reflected in the table at fiscal year end above), increasing the total number of shares available to 25 million. |
(3) | There are no shares available for future issuance under the ONI Plans. However, any shares subject to outstanding options or other awards under the ONI Plans that are forfeited upon cancellation become available for grant and issuance under the 2000 Plan. |
(4) | Consists of the following equity compensation plans: |
• | 1999 Non-Officer Stock Option Plan; and | |
• | equity compensation plans assumed by Ciena in connection with mergers or acquisitions, including the Cyras Systems, Inc. 1998 Stock Plan, the Omnia Communications, Inc. 1997 Stock Plan, the Lightera Networks, Inc. 1998 Stock Plan, the WaveSmith Networks, Inc. 2000 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, the Internet Photonics, Inc. 2000 Corporate Stock Option Plan and the Catena Networks, Inc. 1998 Equity Incentive Plan. |
(5) | By operation of the determination of the Board of Directors to cap future grants from equity incentive plans other than the 2000 Plan and the ESPP. |
28
General |
29
Base Salary |
Bonus Program |
Equity-Based Long-Term Incentive Compensation |
• | 1994 Third Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan, a plan under which executive officers, key employees and non-employee directors may be granted options; | |
• | 1999 Non-Officer Stock Option Plan, a broad-based plan under which options may be granted to all employees other than executive officers; | |
• | Ciena Corporation 2000 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2000 Plan”), a plan under which executive officers, key employees and non-employee directors may be granted options, restricted stock, and other forms of equity-based compensation; and |
30
• | 1996 Outside Directors Stock Option Plan, a plan that provides for automatic grants to non-employee directors. |
Perquisites |
Salaries |
Bonus Program |
Long-Term Incentive Compensation of Members of the Executive Leadership Team |
Executive Chairman Compensation |
Chief Executive Officer Compensation |
31
Salaries |
Bonus Program |
Long-Term Incentive Program |
• | to reexamine and revise Ciena’s overall strategy for using equity in compensating employees and executives in view of changes in the needs of the company and in the external environment; | |
• | to develop an approach to equity grants for the executive leadership team in view of a revised strategy; and | |
• | to arrive at specific grants for the executive team for fiscal 2006. |
• | Since we have paid no bonuses and approved only isolated increases in salary since 2001, substantial equity grants are appropriate to assure the retention of key executives and provide appropriate incentives. | |
• | A portion of the equity grants should include performance-based vesting to provide amplified incentives to achieve Ciena’s key financial goals. |
32
• | The “burn rate” for all grants under the 2000 Plan should remain at or below the burn rate of comparable companies and should in any event not exceed a maximum of 2.5% to 3% of Ciena’s outstanding common shares. |
33
Executive Chairman Compensation |
Chief Executive Officer Compensation |
Other Actions |
34
Submitted by the members of the Compensation Committee: Judith O’Brien (Chairperson) Harvey B. Cash Don H. Davis, Jr. Gerald H. Taylor |
35
The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed Ciena’s audited financial statements for fiscal 2005 with management and with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The Audit Committee has discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP the matters required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61, which relates to the conduct of the audit. The Audit Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP required by Independence Standards Board Standard No. 1, Independence Discussions with Audit Committees, and has discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP its independence. Based on the Audit Committee’s review of the audited financial statements and the review and discussions described in this report, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited financial statements for fiscal 2005 be included in Ciena’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal 2005 for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Submitted by the members of the Audit Committee: Lawton W. Fitt (Chairperson) Stephen P. Bradley, Ph.D. Michael J. Rowny |
36
37
38
By Order of the Board of Directors, | |
Russell B. Stevenson, Jr. | |
Secretary |
39
• | Appoint and establish the compensation of the Company’s independent auditors, and oversee their work; | |
• | Approve in advance all audit and non-audit services to be performed by the Company’s independent auditors, unless Committee approval is not required by applicable laws, rules or regulations; | |
• | Resolve disagreements between management and the Company’s independent public accountants regarding financial reporting; | |
• | Facilitate communication between the independent public accountants and the Board; | |
• | At least annually review and approve the procedures established by the Company for collecting and processing information required to be included in its periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission; | |
• | Periodically review and discuss with management and the independent public accountants the Company’s selection, application and disclosure of critical accounting policies, any significant changes in the Company’s accounting policies and any proposed changes in accounting or financial reporting that may have a significant impact on the Company. When appropriate, the Committee will consider the effect of alternative GAAP methods on the Company’s financial statements; | |
• | Oversee financial reporting processes of the Company with a view to the fulfillment of its responsibilities for the fair and accurate presentation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and SEC regulations; | |
• | Review the Company’s annual report onForm 10-K and discuss it with management and the Company’s independent public accountants prior to its filing with the SEC; | |
• | Review legal, environmental and regulatory matters that may have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements or operations; | |
• | Oversee the accounting processes of the Company including the maintenance of adequate systems of internal controls encompassing management information systems, computer systems, security, disaster |
A-1
recovery and a code of business conduct. In addition, review compliance with these controls as well as significant proposed changes; | ||
• | Assess with management and the independent public accountants significant risks and exposures and evaluate measures management has implemented to reduce such risks; | |
• | Review with the Company’s Chief Financial Officer and the independent public accountants the audit scope and audit plan of the independent public accountants; | |
• | Review with management and the independent public accountants at the completion of the annual audit: |
• | The Company’s annual financial statements and related footnotes. | |
• | The independent public accountant’s audit of the Company’s financial statements and the report thereon including recommended changes in reporting policies or internal controls. | |
• | Any significant changes required in the independent public accountant’s audit plan. | |
• | Any significant difficulties or disputes with management during the course of the audit. | |
• | Other matters related to the audit which are to be communicated to the Committee under generally accepted auditing standards. |
• | Review with the Board of Directors the results of the annual audit including the scope, effectiveness and cost of the audit; | |
• | Review, confirm and assure the independence of the independent accountants by reviewing non-audit services performed by external accountants; | |
• | Review the cost of audit and non-audit services performed by the independent accountants; | |
• | Discuss with the Chief Financial Officer and the independent accountants their qualitative judgments about the appropriateness, not just the acceptability, of accounting principles and financial disclosure practices used or proposed to be adopted by the Company and particularly, about the degree of aggressiveness or conservatism of its accounting principles and underlying estimates; | |
• | Establish procedures for (i) processing complaints regarding accounting, internal controls or auditing matters and (ii) confidential, anonymous submissions by employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters; | |
• | Report Committee actions to the Board of Directors with such recommendations as the Committee may deem appropriate; | |
• | At least annually, review and update the Committee’s Charter; | |
• | The Committee shall perform such other functions as required the Company’s charter or bylaws, the Board of Directors or applicable laws, rules and regulations, including the rules of the SEC and the NASDAQ stock exchange. The Committee shall have the power to conduct or authorize investigations into any matters within the Committee’s scope of responsibilities; | |
• | The Committee shall be empowered to retain independent counsel, accountants or others to the extent the Committee considers necessary to carry out its duties. The Company will pay the expenses associated with all advisors to the Committee. |
Meetings
The Committee shall meet at least four times per year (usually in conjunction with regularly scheduled meetings of the Board of Directors). In addition to the members of the Committee, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Controller and independent public accountants shall attend all regular meetings of the Committee. Other persons may be invited to attend as appropriate. During each of the regular meetings, the Committee members shall meet separately with the Company’s independent public accountants with no members of management present. The Committee shall report to the Board on the major
A-2
A majority of the members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The Committee shall maintain written minutes of its meetings.
Reporting
The Committee shall prepare and, through its Chair, submit periodic reports of the Committee’s work and findings to the Board of Directors; including recommendations for Board actions when considered appropriate by the Committee.
Authority
The Committee shall have the authority to retain special legal, accounting or other consultants to advise the Committee. The Committee may request any officer or employee of the Company or any outside counsel or consultants to meet with any members of the Committee.
Staff
The Corporate Secretary shall provide the Committee such staff support as it may require.
A-3
ANNEX B
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
Ciena Corporation, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, hereby certifies as follows:
1. The name of the corporation is Ciena Corporation. | |
2. This Amendment to Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation has been duly adopted in accordance with the provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware. | |
3. This Amendment to Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation amends Article Fourth of the Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the corporation, as heretofore amended, supplemented and restated, by deleting the first paragraph of Article Fourth thereof and substituting in lieu thereof the a new paragraph, which shall read in its entirety as follows: |
FOURTH: The Corporation shall have the authority to issue two classes of shares to be designated respectively “Preferred Stock” and “Common Stock.” The total number of shares of stock that the Corporation shall have the authority to issue is[216,000,000][160,000,000] or [118,000,000] shares of capital stock, par value $0.01 per share. The total number of shares of Preferred Stock that the Corporation shall have authority to issue is 20,000,000, par value $0.01 per share. The total number of shares of Common Stock which the Corporation shall have the authority to issue is[196,000,000][140,000,000] or [98,000,000], par value $0.01 per share. |
4. This Amendment to Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation further amends Article Fourth of the Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the corporation, as heretofore amended, supplemented and restated, by adding at the end of Article Fourth a new paragraph, which shall read in its entirety as follows: |
Upon the filing and effectiveness (the “Effective Time”) of this amendment to the Corporation’s Certificate of Incorporation pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, each[five] [seven] or [ten] shares of the Common Stock (the “Old Common Stock”) issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time shall be reclassified and combined into one validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable share of the Corporation’s common stock, $.01 par value per share (the “New Common Stock”), without any action by the holder thereof. The Corporation shall not issue fractions of shares of New Common Stock in connection with such reclassification and combination. Shareholders who, immediately prior to the Effective Time, own a number of shares of Old Common Stock which is not evenly divisible by[five] [seven] or [ten]shall, with respect to such fractional interest, be entitled to receive cash from the Corporation in lieu of fractions of shares of New Common Stock from the disposition of such fractional interest as provided below. The Corporation shall arrange for the disposition of fractional interests by those otherwise entitled thereto, by the mechanism of having (x) the transfer agent of the Corporation aggregate such fractional interests and (y) the shares resulting from the aggregation sold and (z) the net proceeds received from the sale be allocated and distributed among the holders of the fractional interests as their respective interests appear. Each certificate that theretofore represented shares of Old Common Stock shall thereafter represent that number of shares of New Common Stock into which the shares of Old Common Stock represented by such certificate shall have been reclassified and combined; provided, that each person holding of record a stock certificate or certificates that |
B-1
represented shares of Old Common Stock shall receive, upon surrender of such certificate or certificates, a new certificate or certificates evidencing and representing the number of shares of New Common Stock to which such person is entitled under the foregoing reclassification and combination. |
5. This Amendment to Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation shall be effective at[effective time], Eastern Time, on[effective date]. |
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Certificate of Amendment to Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation has been executed by a duly authorized officer of the corporation this[ ]day of[ ].
Ciena Corporation |
By: |
Name: | |
Title: |
B-2
CIE-PS-06
DETACH HERE |
This Proxy is Solicited on behalf of the Board of Directors
SEE REVERSE SIDE | CONTINUED AND TO BE SIGNED AND DATED ON REVERSE SIDE | SEE REVERSE SIDE |
C/O COMPUTERSHARE
P.O. BOX 8694
EDISON, NJ 08818-8694
|
OR |
DETACH HERE IF YOU ARE RETURNING YOUR PROXY CARD BY MAIL |
x | Please mark votes as in this example. | #CIE |
1. | Election of two Class III Directors by Shareholders. |
FOR ALL NOMINEES LISTED ABOVE EXCEPT AS MARKED BELOW TO THE CONTRARY | o | o | WITHHOLD AUTHORITY TO VOTE FOR ALL NOMINEES LISTED ABOVE |
2. | To authorize the Board of Directors, in its discretion, to amend Ciena’s Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation to effect a reverse stock split of its outstanding common | FOR o | AGAINST o | ABSTAIN o | ||||||
stock at a ratio of (i) one-for-five, (ii) one-for-seven, or (iii) one-for-ten, together with a corresponding reduction in the number of authorized shares of Ciena common stock and capital stock, at any time prior to the date of Ciena’s 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, without further approval or authorization of Ciena’s shareholders. |
3. | Ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Ciena’s independent registered public accounting firm. | FOR o | AGAINST o | ABSTAIN o |
4. | Shareholder proposal requesting the Board to adopt a majority vote standard for the election of directors. | FOR o | AGAINST o | ABSTAIN o |
PLACE AN "X" HERE IF YOU PLAN TO VOTE YOUR AT THE MEETING. | o |
Signature: | Date: | Signature: | Date: | |||||||||