Basin Water, Inc. - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Decisions

Settlements

Litigation Activity Indices

Top Ten List

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Basin Water, Inc. Summary: Prior to a ruling on the pending motions for dismissal, plaintiffs filed a Stipulation of Settlement outlining a $7 million agreement between parties to dismiss the claims against defendants. The agreement, and motions for preliminary approval were filed March 12, 2009.

On March 24, 2008 the judge ordered related cases consolidated and appointed lead plaintiffs and lead counsel for the class. Plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Complaint against the defendants on April 23, 2008. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss one month later. However, the judge denied the motion without prejudice pending the requested filing by plaintiffs of an amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their amended complaint on October 3, 2008. Motions to dismiss were quickly filed in November 2008.

According to a press release dated December 27, 2007, the complaint charges Basin and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Basin designs, builds and implements systems for the treatment of contaminated groundwater.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and financial results. As a result of defendants’ false statements, Basin stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $13.06 per share on November 8, 2007.

On November 14, 2007, before the market opened, the Company reported its financial results for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, and announced that during the third quarter, the Company recorded a $4.7 million charge to cost of revenues to reserve for future projected losses. The reserve was due primarily to poorly priced contracts, increasing waste disposal and salt purchase costs and the inability to contractually pass increased costs on to the Company’s clients. This charge to cost of revenues was in addition to the reserve previously recorded in the fourth quarter of 2006. On this news, Basin’s stock declined $2.29 per share to close at $8.01 per share, a one-day decline of 22% on volume of 1.4 million shares.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) the Company failed to properly account for its reserves for its legacy system contracts related to its system sales and water service agreement contracts; (b) the Company’s unprofitable legacy business would continue to weigh on the Company’s results for some period of time as the Company was having difficultly reworking its unfavorable legacy contracts; (c) defendants’ Class Period statements that by the end of the second quarter of 2007 the Company had largely completed its internal operational transition of its business practices and processes and had resolved the bulk of the issues concerning its legacy contracts were patently false; and (d) the Company lacked requisite internal controls to ensure that Company was properly accounting for its reserves for its legacy contracts, and, as a result, the Company’s projections and reported results issued during the Class Period were based upon defective assumptions and/or manipulated facts.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 4941
Sector: Utilities
Industry: Water Utilities

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Basin Water, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	BWTR
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.basinwater.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Marilyn A. Poulos, et al. v. Basin Water, Inc., et al.

COURT: C.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-08359
JUDGE NAME: Hon. George H. Wu
DATE FILED: 12/27/2007	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/14/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 11/13/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania) 11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.668.7987, (fax) 610.660.0450, esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego) 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.231.1058, (fax) 619.231.7423, info@csgrr.com/ Law Offices of Alfred G. Yates 519 Alleghany Bldg., 429 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15219 (voice) 412.391.5164, (fax) , _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 12/27/2007
Order Consolidated Related Actions, Appointing Karl Thornbrugh As Lead Plaintiff And Approving His Selection Of Lead Counsel
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 3/24/2008

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Basin Water, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: C.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-08359
JUDGE NAME: Hon. George H Wu
DATE FILED: 10/03/2008	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/14/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 11/13/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Los Angeles) 355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 4170, Los Angeles, CA, 90071 (voice) 213.617.9007, (fax) 213.617.9185, info@csgrr.com/ _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 4/23/2008
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' Consolidated Amended Complaint
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 5/23/2008
Consolidated Amended Compalint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 10/3/2008
Stipulation Regarding Scheduling Of Motion To Approve Settlement And Taking Motion To Dismiss Off Calendar
Type: Settlement		Date on the document: 02/27/2009
Notice Of Motion And Unopposed Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Settlement
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 03/12/2009
Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement
Type: Settlement		Date on the document: 03/12/2009
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 3/12/2009

OTHER DOCUMENTS

Case Name and/or Number:
Type:		Date on the document:

WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.

Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top

�