Case Page


Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 09/30/2004 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: March 28, 1997

According to the latest docket posted, on October 17, 2001, a Notice to Court of Settlement was filed by Bresea Resources. On July 3, 2002, the Court entered the Memorandum Opinion and Order granting the motion for preliminary approval of proposed settlement between Plaintiffs and Bresea. On October 3, 2002, the Court entered the Order granting in part, denying in part the motion to withdraw and substitute certain lead plaintiffs. On March 31, 2003, the Court entered the Order denying the motion to certify the class action. That day, the Court further denied the amended motion to dismiss on the basis of forum non conveniens and international comity. On September 20, 2004, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment approving the settlement and dismissing the claims against defendant Bresea Resources only. On September 23, 2005, the plaintiffs filed a Fifth Amended Complaint against the remaining defendants. On October 23, 2005 the plaintiffs filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice the claims of all plaintiffs, but without prejudice as to certain plaintiffs. On October 27, 2005, the Court entered the Order granting the motion to dismiss all claims of all plaintiffs are with prejudice, except plaintiffs Scott Wilding, New Madras Limited Partnership, Benjamin Kemper, and Deborah L. Foss, whose claims are dismissed without prejudice. Also that day, the Court granted the motion for disbursement of funds.

In a Press Release dated October 27, 2003, on March 31, 2003, the Court denied all of the Plaintiffs' motions to certify the case as a class action. On June 2, 2003, the Plaintiff's submitted a proposed Trial and Case Management Plan, suggesting that the Plan would cure the defects in the Plaintiff's motions to certify the class. The Court has taken no action with respect to the proposed Trial and Case Management Plan. The Plaintiffs' case against the Defendants may now proceed in due course, but not on behalf of a class of Plaintiffs but only with respect to the specific claims of the Plaintiffs named in the lawsuit.

Previously, according to the same Press Release, on July 13, 1999, the Court dismissed the claims against Bre-X Minerals Ltd. on the grounds that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim under United States securities laws. On August 19, 1999, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint restating their claims and on June 14, 2000 filed a further amended complaint, the Fourth Amended Complaint. On March 31, 2001, the Court granted in part and denied in part defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Amended Complaint.

Pursuant to the closing Order, dated July 25, 1997 from U.S. District Judge Edward C. Prado, the action filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas was dismissed without prejudice.

The original complaint alleges that Bre-X and two of its senior officers, David Walsh and John B. Felderhof, issued false and misleading financial statements concerning the amount of gold contained in the Busang gold fields in Indonesia throughout the Class Period in violation of the federal securities laws. At the close of the Class Period it was announced that the amount of gold was negligible based on tests being conducted by an independent company. During the Class Period and prior to the disclosure of the truth, defendants Walsh and Felderhof sold large amounts of their personal stock in Bre-X reaping millions of dollars for their own benefit and at the expense of the members of the Class.

Several similar purported class action lawsuits have also been filed in the District Courts for the Southern District of New York, Western District of Texas, Northern District of California, Northern District of Georgia, and Western District of Washington.


Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Metal Mining
Headquarters: Canada


Ticker Symbol: BXMNF
Company Market: NASDAQ
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data

"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: E.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 97-CV-26
JUDGE: Hon. Edward C. Prado
DATE FILED: 03/28/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/27/1997
  1. Lang, Michener, Lawrence & Shaw
    1500 Royal Centre 1055 West Georgia Street PO Box 11117, Lang, Michener, Lawrence & Shaw, BC 647
    604.689.9110 604.685.7080 ·
  2. Law Office of Ramon Garcia
    106 North Washington Avenue, Law Office of Ramon Garcia, TX
    505.624.0850 ·
  3. Susman, Godfrey LLP (Dallas)
    4100 Bank of America, 901 Main Street, Susman, Godfrey LLP (Dallas), TX 75202
    214.754.1908 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 97-CV-159
JUDGE: Hon. Edward C. Prado
DATE FILED: 09/23/2005
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/02/1997
  1. Susman Godfrey L.L.P. (Houston)
    1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100, Susman Godfrey L.L.P. (Houston), TX 77002
    713.651.9366 ·
  2. Wechsler Harwood LLP
    488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, Wechsler Harwood LLP, NY 10022
    212.935.7400 ·
  3. Yetter & Warden, L.L.P.
    600 Travis, Suite 3800, Yetter & Warden, L.L.P., TX 77002
    713.238.2000 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date