 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
China Automotive Systems, Inc. Summary: According to a press release dated October 26, 2011, the complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws, Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.
The Complaint charges that the Company and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose the following: (i) the Company improperly accounted for its convertible notes issued on February 15, 2008; (ii) that, as a result, the Company's financial results were incorrectly stated; (iii) that the Company's financial results were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; and (iv) China Automotive lacked adequate internal and financial controls.
On March 17, 2011, the Company's audit committee stated it would delay the annual financial statement and would need to restate all previously issued financial statements for the fiscal year 2009 and the first three quarters of 2010. On this news, shares of China Automotive fell to a closing price of $8.81 per share. On March 18, 2011, the Company announced that it received a letter from NASDAQ stating it was no longer in compliance with NASDAQ Marketplace rules.
On February 2, 2012, the Court issued an Order appointing lead plaintiffs and lead counsel.
On February 24, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.
On August 8, 2012, the Court issued an Order ruling on defendants' motions to dismiss. The motion to dismiss of the Company was denied, and the motion of the Company's auditor was granted. Plaintiffs were given leave to file an amended complaint. On August 20, 2012, plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint.
On August 27, 2012, the Court issued an Order appointing co-lead counsel.
On September 25, 2012, the Court issued an Order denying auditor defendant's motion to dismiss.
On January 22, 2013, a Stipulation was filed voluntarily dismissing certain individual defendants from this action without prejudice.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3714
Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Auto & Truck Parts
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | China Automotive Systems, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | CAAS |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.caasauto.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Dennis Kuzmick, et al. v. China Automotive Systems, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/25/2011 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 02/02/2012 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 03/01/2012 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| Nancy George, et al. v. China Automotive Systems, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Amended Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 02/24/2012 | ||
| Opinion & Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 08/08/2012 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order Appointing LP/LC | Date on the document: 08/28/2012 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 08/28/2012 | ||
| Memorandum & Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 09/25/2012 | ||
| Stipulation of Dismissal Without Prejudice Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 01/22/2013 | ||
| 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