Pitney Bowes, 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

Pitney Bowes, Inc. Summary: According to a press release dated October 28, 2009, the complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants made numerous positive statements regarding the Company’s financial condition, business and prospects. The complaint further alleges that these statements were inaccurate statements of material fact when made because defendants failed to disclose: (i) that the Company was experiencing a slowdown in sales of equipment and software and supplies to the financial services sector; (ii) that revenues in the Company’s U.S. mailing segment had dramatically declined and were not performing according to internal expectations; (iii) that the Company’s international operations were not performing to internal expectations as market liberalization and deregulation was causing customers to delay purchasing decisions. For example, in France, a change in the method of meter rentals was causing delayed purchasing decisions and increased selling and marketing costs; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing and other adverse undisclosed factors, there was no reasonable basis for defendants’ positive statements about the Company, its operations and earnings.

On October 29, 2007, Pitney Bowes held a conference call with analysts and investors to discuss the Company’s earnings and operations. During the conference call, defendants admitted that a host of factors caused Pitney Bowes to drastically miss the earnings they had promised. In response to the Company’s announcement, the price of Pitney Bowes common stock declined from $42.68 per share to $36.27 per share on extremely heavy trading volume.

On July 14, 2010, the Court appointed the Labourers’ Pension Fund of Central and Eastern Canada as Lead Plaintiff and the law firm of Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP was appointed Lead Counsel.

On September 20, 2010, an Amended Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws was filed by the lead plaintiffs against the defendants.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3579
Sector: Technology
Industry: Office Equipment

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Pitney Bowes, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	PBI
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.pb.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund , et al. v. Pitney Bowes, Inc., et al.

COURT: D. Connecticut	DOCKET NUMBER: 09-CV-01740
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Christopher F. Droney
DATE FILED: 10/28/2009	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/30/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/29/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Cavanagh & O'Hara 407 East Adams Street, Springfield, IL, 62701 (voice) 217.544.1771, (fax) 217.544.1771, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (NY) 200 Broadhollow Road, Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631-367-7100, (fax) 631-367-1173, info@csgrr.com/ Diserio Martin O'Connor & Castiglioni LLP 1 Atlantic Street, Stamford, CT, 06901 (voice) 203.358.0800, (fax) 203.348.2321, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/28/2009
Order Appointing lead Plaintiff And Approving Selection Of Lead And Liaison Counsel
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 07/14/2010

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund, et al. v. Pitney Bowes, Inc., et al.

COURT: D. Connecticut	DOCKET NUMBER: 09-CV-01740
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 09/20/2010	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/30/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/29/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego) 401 B Street, Suite 1700, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 206.749.5544, (fax) 206.749.9978, info@csgrr.com/ _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Amended Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 09/20/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 09/20/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/16/2011

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

�