Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 08/03/2007 (Other)

Filing Date: September 24, 2004

According to a press release dated August 15, 2007, on July 10, 2007, the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's dismissal of a securities fraud class action against a company and its officers, finding that the plaintiffs failed to allege scienter with particularity as required by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA).

On May 1, 2006, the plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

In a press release dated April 4, 2006, Stonepath Group, a global logistics services organization, announced that the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has granted Stonepath's motion to dismiss the second consolidated amended class action complaint with regard to In re Stonepath Group, Inc. Securities Litigation. The order granting the motion to dismiss does not provide the plaintiff with the opportunity to file an amended complaint and enters judgment in favor of the defendants. If the plaintiffs choose to proceed, they could appeal the district court's ruling to the United States Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit.

On November 15, 2005, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint agains the defendants

In a press release dated November 1, 2005, Stonepath Group (AMEX: STG), a global logistics services organization, today announced the dismissal of the consolidated class action complaint In re Stonepath Group, Inc. Securities Litigation. The complaint alleged claims for securities fraud under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. It was filed earlier this year in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after the consolidation of eight separate actions that were filed last fall shortly after Stonepath announced that it would restate its financial statements for prior periods. The order dismissing the complaint provides the plaintiff with the opportunity to file an amended complaint.

The original complaint charges Stonepath Group, Inc., and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented that the Company understated its accrued purchased transportation liability and related costs of purchased transportation rendering the Company's Class Period financial statements materially false and misleading because they understated the Company's liabilities and expenses, and overstated the Company's net income and earnings before income, taxes, depreciation, and amortization ('EBITDA'). As a result of the above, the Company's reported financial results were in violation of GAAP. On September 20, 2004, the Company reported that it intended to restate its fiscal year 2003 and first and second quarter of 2004 financial statements. As a result of this news, the price of StonePath stock closed at $0.86 per share (on heavy trading volume of 4,830,200 shares), a 46% decrease from its close on September 19, 2004.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Transportation
Industry: Misc. Transportation
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: STG
Company Market: American SE
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. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 04-CV-4515
JUDGE: Hon. Stewart Dalzell
DATE FILED: 09/24/2004
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/07/2003
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/20/2004
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (MA)
    One Liberty Square, Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (MA), MA 2109
    617.542.8300 617.230.0903 · info@bermanesq.com
  2. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
  3. Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP
    100 Park Avenue, Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, NY 10017
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@glrslaw.com
  4. Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia) (former)
    1515 Locust Street, 2nd Floor, Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia) (former), PA 19102
    215-561-3600 215-561-3000 · bmgross@bernardmgross.com
  5. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
    World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A., MD 21202
    410.332.0030 · pivenlaw@erols.com
  6. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (NY)
    200 Broadhollow Road, Suite 406, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (NY), NY 11747
    631-367-7100 631-367-1173 ·
  7. Mager White & Goldstein, LLP
    2825 University Drive, Suite 350, Mager White & Goldstein, LLP, FL 33065
    954.341.0844 954.341.0855 · info@mwglawfirm.com
  8. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), NY 10119
    212.594.5300 212.868.1229 · info@milbergweiss.com
  9. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York)
    270 Madison Avenue, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.545.4600 212.686.0114 · newyork@whafh.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 04-CV-4515
JUDGE: Hon. Stewart Dalzell
DATE FILED: 11/15/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/29/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/20/2004
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
  2. Curtis V. Trinko LLP
    16 West 46th Street 7th Floor, Curtis V. Trinko LLP, NY 10036
    212.490.9550 212.986.0158 · ctrinko@trinko.com
  3. Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia) (former)
    1515 Locust Street, 2nd Floor, Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia) (former), PA 19102
    215-561-3600 215-561-3000 · bmgross@bernardmgross.com
  4. Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Bala Cynwyd)
    273 Montgomery Ave. Suite 202, Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Bala Cynwyd), PA 19004
    610.660.8000 610.660.8080 · securitiesfraud@comcast.net
  5. Mager White & Goldstein, LLP
    2825 University Drive, Suite 350, Mager White & Goldstein, LLP, FL 33065
    954.341.0844 954.341.0855 · info@mwglawfirm.com
No Document Title Filing Date