Stryker Corporation - 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

Stryker Corporation Summary: According to a press release dated January 15, 2010, the complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s true financial condition, business and prospects. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants: i) violated federal regulations regarding the manufacture of medical devices; ii) subjected the Company to unnecessary risks of sales disruptions, lower revenues and product liabilities due to product recalls; and iii) hid hundreds of millions of dollars of additional compliance costs both prior to and during the Class Period, allowing defendants to falsely report and/or project 20%+ earnings growth for Stryker during 2006, 2007 and 2008.

On November 13, 2008, during an investor conference hosted by Credit Suisse, Stryker revealed that it was still losing revenues and customers as a result of a January 2008 hip product recall. Following these statements Stryker common declined 23% closing at $36.11 per share on November 20, 2008.

On May 21, 2010, a Motion To Transfer Venue to the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Kalamazoo was granted.

On January 3, 2011, Judge Gordon J. Quist granted the motion to appoint the P Genesee County Employees' Retirement System, Alaska Electrical Pension Fund, State-Boston Retirement System as lead plaintiffs. On March 25, 2011, the plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint. The defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint on April 19, 2011, and their motion was denied on July 6, 2011.

On August 19, 2011, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3841
Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Medical Equipment & Supplies

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Stryker Corporation
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	SYK
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.strykercorp.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

City of Pontiac General Employee's Retirement System, et al. v. Stryker Corporation, et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 10-CV-00376
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Robert W. Sweet
DATE FILED: 01/15/2010	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/25/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 11/13/2008
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
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/ _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Complaint For Violation of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/15/2010
Opinion
Type: Order		Date on the document: 05/21/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/02/2010

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

City of Pontiac General Employee's Retirement System, et al. v. Stryker Corporation, et al.

COURT: W.D. Michigan	DOCKET NUMBER: 10-CV-00520
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 03/25/2011	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/25/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 11/13/2008
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Labaton Sucharow LLP 140 Broadway, New York, NY, 10005 (voice) 212.907.0700, (fax) 212.818.0477, info@labaton.com Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville) 58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Memorandum Order
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 01/03/2011
Amended Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/25/2011
Opinion
Type: Other		Date on the document: 07/06/2011
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 07/06/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 11/16/2011

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

�