|
In re Hansen Natural Corporation Securities Litigation
USDC CD California
Option Timing
Background
|
 Company
background
Litigation
background
- In re Hansen Natural Corporation Securities
Litigation
- USDC CD California (Western
Division - Los Angeles)
06-cv-07599-JFW-PLA
Lead
plaintiffs
- Communications Workers of America Plan for
Employees Pensions and Death Benefits
- Iron Workers Local No. 25 Pension Fund
SEC
disclosure
- Form 10-Q
11.09.07 At page 44
Securities Litigation - From November 2006 through December 2006, several
plaintiffs filed shareholder class actions in the United States District Court
for the Central District of California against Hansen and certain of its
employees, officers and directors, entitled Hutton v. Hansen Natural Corp., et
al. (No. 06-07599), Kingery v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. (No. 06-07771),
Williams v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. (No. 06-01369), Ziolkowski v. Hansen
Natural Corp., et al. (No. ED 06-01403), Walker v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al.
(No. 06-08229) (the Class Actions). On February 27, 2007, the Class Actions
were consolidated by the District Court and styled as In re Hansen Natural
Corporation Securities Litigation (CV06-07599 JFW (PLAx)). The Court appointed
Jason E. Peltier as lead plaintiff (Lead Plaintiff) and approved lead counsel.
Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated class action complaint on April 30, 2007.
The consolidated class action complaint superseded all previously filed class
action complaints and became the operative complaint to which the Company had to
respond. Lead Plaintiff alleged, on behalf of all persons who purchased Hansen
common stock during the period beginning November 12, 2001 through November 9,
2006 (the Class Period), that Hansen and the individual defendants
(collectively, the "Defendants") made misleading statements and omissions of
material fact which artificially inflated the market price of Hansen common
stock throughout the Class Period. Plaintiffs further allege that defendants
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by misrepresenting or failing to disclose that defendants incorrectly
dated stock option grants, that the Companys internal controls were inadequate,
and that, as a result, defendants engaged in improper accounting practices.
Plaintiff sought an unspecified amount of damages.
On June 25, 2007, the Defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated class action
complaint. On October 16, 2007, the District Court granted the Defendants'
motions to dismiss the consolidated class action complaint with prejudice and
without leave to amend. The Court then entered final judgment in favor of the
Defendants.
|
Motion to Dismiss Granted
SEC_CODE_REF_0090001192884
Counsel
|
Lead
plaintiff
Company
defense
- Bird, Marella
- Schulte Roth
|
Related Topics
|
