Matrixx Initiatives, 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

Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. Summary: According to a press release dated July 17, 2009, the complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona and seeks damages for violations of federal securities laws on behalf of all investors who purchased Matrixx stock between December 22, 2007 and June 15, 2009, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Matrixx is a nutrient and drug delivery company that develops, manufactures and markets delivery systems for bioactive compounds. The Company, through its subsidiary, produces, markets and sells, among other pharmaceutical products, Zicam Cold Remedy nasal gel, Zicam Cold Remedy gel swabs, and Zicam Cold Remedy children's swabs.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants failed to disclose material adverse facts concerning the Company's operational well-being and future prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose or indicate (1) that Matrixx had received notice of hundreds of serious adverse events involving consumers' use of the Zicam Cold Remedy Products; (2) that Matrixx failed to report these incidents to the FDA despite having an obligation to do so; (3) that the Company failed to comply with FDA regulations despite repeated assurances of its compliance; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's statements about its meeting FDA regulations were false and misleading when made.

As a result of this news, the Company's shares declined $13.46 per share, or an astounding 70 percent, to close on June 16, 2009 at $5.78 per share, on unusually heavy trading volume.

On July 27, 2010, an order was issued by the court appointing lead plaintiff and lead counsel in the in this action.

On September 27, 2010, an Amended Class Action Complaint was filed by the lead plaintiffs against the defendants.

On September 26, 2011, the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Amended Class Action Complaint was Denied.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2834
Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Matrixx Initiatives, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	MTXX
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.matrixxinc.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

David Shapiro, et al. v. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., et al.

COURT: D. Arizona	DOCKET NUMBER: 09-CV-01479
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Edward C Voss
DATE FILED: 07/17/2009	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/22/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 06/15/2009
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) 369 Lexington. Avenue, 10th Floor , New York, , (voice) 212..983.9330, (fax) 212..983.9331, Saxena White PA (Boca Raton) 2424 N. Federal Highway, Suite 257, Boca Raton, FL, 33431 (voice) 561.394.3399, (fax) 561.394.3399, Tiffany & Bosco, P.A. Third Floor Camelback; Esplanade II; 2525 East Camelback Road, Phoenix, AR, 85016-4237 (voice) 602.255.6000, (fax) 602.255.6000, general@tblaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 07/17/2009
Order
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 07/28/2010
Amended Class Action Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 09/27/2010

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

de La Soujeole, et al. v. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. et al

COURT: D. Arizona	DOCKET NUMBER: 09-CV-01479
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 09/27/2010	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/22/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 06/15/2009
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (Los Angeles) 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Second Floor, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) 310.461.1426, (fax) 310.461.1427, Saxena White PA (Boca Raton) 2424 N. Federal Highway, Suite 257, Boca Raton, FL, 33431 (voice) 561.394.3399, (fax) 561.394.3399, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 09/27/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/25/2011
Order
Type: Other		Date on the document: 09/26/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 09/26/2011

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Verified Shareholder Derivative Complaint
Case Name and/or Number: Timothy Hall, et al. v. Hemelt, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 09/11/2009
Verified Shareholder Derivative Complaint For Breach Of Fiduciary Duty, Waste Of Corporate Assets, Unjust Enrichment And Violations Of §10(b) And Rule 10b-5 Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934
Case Name and/or Number: Theodore C. Klatt, et al. v. Hemelt, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 09/18/2009

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

�