|
|
|
Ducommun to sell $200M in notes to fund purchase
Securities Lawyers |
2011/06/20 05:14
|
Aerospace parts maker Ducommun Inc. said Monday that it will offer $200 million in senior notes to help pay for its pending acquisition of LaBarge Inc. The unsecured notes, due in 2018, will be sold after closing of the $340 million LaBarge deal, which Ducommun expects to happen Thursday after a LaBarge stockholders' meeting. The notes will be sold to institutional buyers. LaBarge, based in LaDue, Mo., makes electronic circuit boards, cables and other components. LaBarge and Ducommun, based in Carson, Calif., announced the deal in April. LaBarge's largest customers include Boeing, Raytheon and General Electric. Last year, it had revenue of $324 million. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason LLP Announce Notice of Class Action
Securities Class Action |
2011/06/20 05:14
|
A federal court certified a nationwide settlement class of individuals and companies that purchased SRAM indirectly from one or more Defendants (the "Settlement Class"). Defendants are corporations that indirectly sold SRAM to customers in the United States. For a full list of the defendants, visit the website below. The case is In Re Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) Antitrust Litigation, No. 4:07-md-1819 CW in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
What is the Class Action About?
Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants conspired to fix, raise, maintain or stabilize prices of SRAM in violation of antitrust, unfair competition and unjust enrichment laws, resulting in overcharges to customers who indirectly purchased SRAM. Defendants deny that they did anything wrong. The court has not decided who is right. Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. and Defendant Cypress Semiconductor Corp. (the "Settling Defendants") have agreed to settle with Plaintiffs; they continue to deny liability, but settled to avoid litigation expense and risk.
Who's Included?
You are a member of the Settlement Class and could get benefits if you indirectly purchased SRAM from one of the Defendants in the United States during the period November 1, 1996 through December 31, 2006. SRAM is a memory part or module that is sold by itself or as a part in electronic devices.
What Does the Settlement Provide?
The Settling Defendants have agreed to pay a total of $15,900,000. Copies of the Settlement Agreements are available at the website below. In 2010, the Court approved settlements with other defendants that total $25,422,000 (the "2010 Settlements"); those settlements are now final and binding on the Settlement Class.
How Will the Money Be Distributed?
The total Settlement Fund from all settlements is $41,322,000. The Settlement Class includes indirect purchasers of SRAM that resold Defendants' SRAM ("Resellers"), as well as indirect purchasers of Defendants' SRAM that purchased it for their own use and not for resale ("End Users"). The Net Settlement Fund (the Settlement Fund minus court-approved costs, attorneys' fees and incentive awards), will be distributed as follows: (1) 36.7% of the Net Settlement Fund will be distributed to qualified Resellers through a court-approved claims process; and (2) 63.3% of the Net Settlement Fund will be distributed via a court-approved cy pres plan to non-profit charities for the benefit of End Users. The cy pres portion of the distribution plan is due to the high cost of processing claims and making direct cash distributions to many thousands of potential claimants relative to the average likely award to those claimants. Under the cy pres plan of distribution, payments will not be made to individual class members; instead, that portion of the Net Settlement Fund will be distributed to court-approved non-profit charities. Go to the website below to see the distribution plan details or the proposed list of non-profit charities. Unclaimed funds from the Reseller claims process, if any, will be added to the cy pres distribution. Class Counsel will request attorneys' fees in the amount of one-third of the Settlement Fund, reimbursement of their costs and expenses, and incentive payments for the court-appointed class representatives. The attorneys' fees application shall be filed by August 1, 2011, and will be posted on the case website.
Who Represents You?
The Court has appointed Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason LLP as Class Counsel. You do not have to pay these lawyers to represent you. You may hire your own attorney, if you wish; however, you will be responsible for your own attorney's fees and expenses.
What Are Your Options?
If you do not want to be a part of the Settlement Class or legally bound by the Samsung and Cypress settlements, you must exclude yourself from the Settlement Class. You may not exclude yourself from the 2010 Settlements. To exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you must do so in writing, postmarked no later than August 25, 2011.
The Court has scheduled a Fairness Hearing for October 6, 2011 and will consider whether to approve the proposed settlements, distribution plan and requests for attorneys' fees, costs and incentive payments. This date may change without further notice. Any new hearing date or time will be posted on the website below.
You may object to or comment on any part of the proposed settlement. Your objection/comment must be filed with the Court by August 25, 2011. You may also request in writing to speak at the Final Approval Hearing.
If you are a Reseller and want to make a claim, or for more information, you may 1) write to SRAM Indirect Litigation, P.O. Box 8090, San Rafael, CA 94912, 2) call the toll free phone number 1-866-252-7551, or 3) visit the website www.indirectsramcase.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class action suit filed against Armtec
Securities Class Action |
2011/06/20 04:19
|
A class-action lawsuit has been filed against infrastructure products maker Armtec Infrastructure Inc. alleging the company broke securities laws when it instituted a dividend, later to cancel it after it became unsupportable by earnings.
The suit filed in Ontario Superior Court on behalf of investors who bought shares between March 30 and June 8 alleges that Armtec should have known when it raised capital in the public market that it did not have sufficient earnings to pay dividends.
"Through this class action, we hope to determine precisely what the defendants knew about Armtec's financial results when Armtec raised more than $50 million from investors," lawyer Jay Strosberg of Sutts, Strosberg LLP said in a statement.
Armtec shares plummeted earlier this month after the Ontario-based announced a widening of its first-quarter loss and the planned suspension of the 40 cent per share dividend. The dropped 22 cents or six per cent to $3.43 in early trading Friday on the Toronto Stock Exchange.
Class action lawsuits must be certified by a judge in order to proceed. None of the allegations against Armtec have been proven in court.
In a statement issued late Friday, Armtec said it was "confident that there are no grounds for a lawsuit to succeed."
"If, however, this suit proceeds, Armtec will defend it vigorously based on, amongst other things, Armtec's disclosure of the risk factors associated with its business and to the payment of a dividend."
The Guelph-based company, which makes construction materials such as precast concrete and tubing, said business was hurt by an unusually late and wet spring across the country during the quarter and ended up with a payout significantly in excess of free cash flow.
The company said it had to meet certain terms in its credit facilities and meet earnings tests on senior notes to be permitted to pay dividends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ford shares fall after $2B judgment in dealer suit
Court News |
2011/06/13 20:27
|
Ford Motor Co. shares sank early Monday after an Ohio judge said the automaker had to pay nearly $2 billion in damages to thousands of dealerships who participated in a 2002 class-action lawsuit. But the shares pared their losses as several analysts downplayed the news and said Ford can absorb the damages even if loses a planned appeal.
Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Peter Corrigan in Cleveland issued the ruling based on a Feb. 11 jury determination that the company overcharged dealers for commercial trucks over 11 years. The $2 billion award covers more than 3,000 dealerships and about 474,000 trucks. It includes a judgment of about $781 million and about $1.2 billion in interest.
Ford is appealing the decision. Ford chief counsel David Leitch said Monday that it will likely take several years for the case to wind its way through the Ohio appeals system.
Standard and Poor's reiterated its "Buy" rating on Ford Monday afternoon, saying that if Ford loses the appeal it would be "costly but absorbable," with Ford taking a hit of around 47 cents per share. Barclays Capital analysts also reiterated a "Overweight/Neutral" rating and said they don't expect a significant impact to Ford's cash position in the near term because of the length of the appeals process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court orders reconsideration of parole judgment
Court Watch |
2011/06/13 20:27
|
The Supreme Court has ordered a lower court to reconsider its decision to release a criminal on parole.
The high court threw out a lower court decision ordering John Pirtle and other prisoners released from prison on parole.
Pirtle was convicted of killing his wife, and the parole board started denying him parole in 2002. Pirtle sued in federal court, saying his parole was denied without any proof that he posed a danger if he got out.
The lower courts agreed with him and ordered him and other prisoners in similar situations released on parole.
The high court threw out that decision in a summary judgment and ordered the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to reconsider it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Investment Fraud Litigation |
|
|
|
|
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
|
|
|
| |
| |
| |
|
The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
