Neptune Technologies & Bioresources Inc. Summary: According to a law firm press release, The complaint alleges that the Company issued a series of materially false and misleading statements to investors misrepresenting its business success and future prospects. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants made false and misleading statements regarding Neptune's highly publicized expansion of its Sherbrooke production facility because it failed to disclose that it had not acquired the required building permits. The planned expansion would have allowed Neptune to increase its production capacity of krill oil from 150,000 kg per year to 500,000 kg per year, increasing profit margins, revenues, and earnings. Further, according to the complaint, Neptune failed to disclose that it had installed larger than permitted storage tanks in its Sherbrooke facility, allowing the Company to store dangerously high levels of acetone. As a result of these misrepresentations and omissions, Neptune's stock traded at artificially high prices during the Class Period reaching a high of $5.14 per share on July 2, 2012.
Then, on November 8, 2012, an explosion and fire at the Sherbrooke plant destroyed Neptune's only production and storage facility, and damaged its expansion facility, then under construction. On this news, NASDAQ Capital Market halted trading of Neptune's stock until November 26, 2012. When trading resumed on November 27, 2012, Neptune's share price fell $1.18 per share, or approximately 32%, from its November 7, 2012 closing price.
On May 8, 2013, the Court issued an Order appointing lead plaintiffs and approving the selection of lead counsel.
On May 9, 2013, the parties entered into a Stipulation and agreed to voluntarily dismiss this case without prejudice.
SIC Code: 2834
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
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