Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 03/24/2005 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: February 13, 2003

According to the docket posted, on February 9, 2004, the defendants filed a Stipulation of Dismissal, and on March 25, 2005, the Court entered the Order signed by U.S. District Judge Martin J. Jenkins, dismissing the case. Earlier, on August 11, 2003, after the plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint, the defendants responded with a motion to dismiss. The motion to dismiss was granted on November 5, 2003, and on January 5, 2004, the defendants filed a second motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution.

The original Complaint alleges that Monterey Pasta Co. and certain of its officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the complaint alleges defendants released public statements and SEC filings containing material misrepresentations and omissions concerning the Company’s operating and financial conditions, thereby artificially inflating the price of Monterey Pasta securities.

The complaint further alleges that defendants’ false and misleading statements propelled Monterey Pasta’s common
stock to a Class Period high of $8.78. On or around December 17, 2002, Monterey Pasta’s stock collapsed by 37.8% to close at $4.26 per share on extraordinarily high trading volume of more than 2 million shares when the Company revealed it had been experiencing sales problems with its two largest customers, Costco and Sam’s, since June 2002.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Consumer Non-Cyclical
Industry: Food Processing
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: PSTA
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 03-CV-00632
JUDGE: Hon. Martin J. Jenkins
DATE FILED: 02/13/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/11/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/16/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bull & Lifshitz
    18 East 41st St., Bull & Lifshitz, NY 10017
    212.213.6222 212.213.9405 ·
  2. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York)
    200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
  3. Glancy Binkow & GoldBerg LLP
    1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Glancy Binkow & GoldBerg LLP, CA 90067
    310-201-9150 · info@glancylaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 03-CV-00632
JUDGE: Hon. Martin J. Jenkins
DATE FILED: 07/11/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/11/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/16/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bull & Lifshitz
    18 East 41st St., Bull & Lifshitz, NY 10017
    212.213.6222 212.213.9405 ·
  2. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR)
    P.O. Box 25438, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR), AR 72221-5438
    501.312.8500 501.312.8505 ·
  3. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York)
    200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
  4. Green & Jigarjian LLP
    235 Pine Street, 15th Floor, Green & Jigarjian LLP, CA 94104
    415.477.6700 415.477.6710 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date