According to the docket, on September 6, 2001, the Court entered the Order by U.S. District Judge Benson E. Legg certifying the action as a class action for persons/purchasers of Common Stock of IC Isaacs. On November 20, 2001, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment approving the Settlement Agreement as fair, reasonable, and adequate and dismissing the Complaint with Prejudice and without costs except as provided in the Stipulation. Further, the Plan of Allocation was approved as fair and reasonable, and Plaintiffs' counsel were awarded the sum of $275,000 as and for their attorneys' fees and in reimbursement of expenses. The case is closed. According to the Notice of Settlement posted, the Settlement Fund established was in the amount of $625, 000.
As reported in the Company's Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2001, on June 19, 2001, the Company reached a tentative agreement to settle the consolidated class action lawsuit.
The original complaint alleges that Isaacs and certain officers and directors of Isaacs during the Class Period violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing materially false and misleading statements in connection with Isaacs' initial public offering on December 17, 1997 regarding the products, business operations and prospects of Isaacs.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's initial public offering, completed in December 1997, contained materially false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's products, business operations and prospects and that the Company issued a series of materially false and misleading statements, which artificially inflated the price of the Company's common stock during the class period. Specifically, it alleges violations of Sections 11,12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors. The plaintiffs seek recession, damages, costs expenses, including attorneys' fees and experts' fees, and such other relief as may be just and proper. The Company believes that the allegations set forth in the complaint are without merit and intends to vigorously contest the allegations contained therein.