Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 03/10/2009 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: August 01, 2005

After the Settlement Fairness Hearing adjourned, the judge entered a Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal, approving the settlement and terminating the case on March 10, 2009.

On December 12, 2008 the judge preliminarily approved the proposed settlement and set a Settlement Fairness Hearing for March 10, 2009.

On November 19, 2008 the lead plaintiff submitted a Stipulation of Settlement and a motion for preliminary approval of the agreement. Stated in the agreement, defendants will pay $11,250,000 for the release of claims and counsel will apply for fees up to 30% of the settlement fund and reimbursement of $250,000 in expenses.

According to a press release dated September 23, 2008, Mannatech, Inc., reached a tentative settlement in the securities class action lawsuit styled "Jonathan Crowell v. Mannatech, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 3:07 CV-00238-K," which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, according to the company's Aug. 11, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2008.

Despite the announced agreement to settle, plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Consolidated Complaint against all defendants on April 3, 2008. No additional filings have been made as of August 29, 2008 and no additional information regarding the settlement has been made available.

According to a press release dated March 20, 2008, Mannatech, Incorporated announced that the Company and counsel for the lead plaintiff have reached a settlement in the securities class action lawsuit styled Jonathan Crowell v. Mannatech, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 3:07-CV-00238-K, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas ("the litigation"). The litigation is the consolidation of three securities class action complaints filed against Mannatech, Incorporated, and certain of its officers and directors in August and September 2005. The settlement class consists of the purchasers of Mannatech stock during the period August 10, 2004 through July 30, 2007. This settlement, which is subject to among other things preliminary and final Court approval, would resolve all the claims in the litigation. Without admitting any liability or wrongdoing of any kind, the Company has agreed to authorize payment to the plaintiff class of $11.25 million. This settlement payment would be funded by both the Company' s insurer and the Company itself. Because the litigation is a class action, the settlement is subject to the preliminary approval of the Court as well as the Court' s final approval after notice of the terms of the settlement has been provided to all class members.

In a press release dated July 17, 2007, on July 12, 2007, as a result of the July 5, 2007 disclosure of the Texas Attorney General complaint and the July 6, 2007 stock drop, Lerach Coughlin filed a Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint for Securities Fraud (the “Second Amended Complaint”), which included additional claims in connection with these events. The Second Amended Complaint was filed on behalf of purchasers of Mannatech common stock between the period of August 10, 2004 through July 5, 2007.

As summarized by the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007, three lawsuits were initially filed in the District of New Mexico and consolidated on December 12, 2005 into the civil action styled “In re Mannatech, Incorporated Securities Litigation.” The Mannatech Group, consisting of Mr. Austin Chang, Ms. Naomi S. Miller, Mr. John Ogden, and the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 51 Pension Fund, has been appointed as lead plaintiffs, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP has been appointed as lead counsel and Claxton & Hill, PLLC has been appointed local counsel, for the putative class. On January 29, 2007, the Court in the District of New Mexico granted the Company’s motion to transfer venue to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. On March 9, 2007, an unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint for Securities Fraud was filed by lead plaintiffs for the putative class. The Amended Consolidated Complaint proposed by the lead plaintiffs is substantively similar to the Consolidated Class Action Complaint filed on March 3, 2006. Lead plaintiffs allege the Company violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by artificially inflating the value of the Company’s common stock by knowingly allowing independent contractors to recklessly misrepresent the efficacy of its products during the purported class period. The Amended Complaint expands the class period, as alleged in the Consolidated Class Action Complaint, to October 27, 2006, and also adds new allegations based on news reports of potential regulatory or enforcement actions by the State of Texas involving selling and promotional activities of the Company and/or its independent associates. The Company is required to answer or move to dismiss the Amended Complaint by May 21, 2007.

Several purported shareholder class action lawsuits have been filed against Mannatech and a certain officer charging the defendants with violations of federal securities laws. Plaintiff claims defendants issued false or misleading statements concerning the Company's business and operations, which caused Mannatech's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors. Mannatech operates in the field of "glyconutrients" and designs and develops proprietary nutritional supplements, topical products and weight management products, sold primarily by purportedly independent sales associates and members through a network-marketing system -- commonly known as "multilevel marketing." The Complaint alleges Mannatech failed to adequately supervise and/or monitor the conduct of its associates, including those who maintain websites that prominently display misleading testimonials and/or falsely suggest that Mannatech products are effective in the treatment and prevention of certain specific diseases. The Complaint alleges that, unbeknownst to public investors, the true facts which defendants knew and/or recklessly disregarded and failed to disclose to the investing public during the Class Period, included: (i) that the Company's internal controls were inadequate, and failed in several key aspects, resulting in inadequate monitoring and supervision of the Company's associates; (ii) as a consequence of defendants' failure to supervise, Mannatech associates made false and unfounded claims concerning the efficacy of the Company's products; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' statements with respect to Mannatech's operations, performance and prospects were lacking in any reasonable basis when made.

The complaint further alleges that on or around May 9, 2005, an article published in Barron's revealed the misleading nature of claims made on certain Mannatech associates' websites. This new shocked the market, causing the price of Mannatech shares to plummet more than 26 percent in one day, thereby damaging investors. The next day, May 10, 2005, Mannatech shares fell an additional 19 percent as a result of this news.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: MTEX
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. Texas
DOCKET #: 05-CV-829
JUDGE: Hon. James A. Parker
DATE FILED: 08/01/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/10/2004
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/08/2005
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City)
    120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City), OK 73102
    405-235-1560 · wfederman@aol.com
  2. Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles)
    1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles), CA 90067
    310.201.915 310. 201-916 · info@glancylaw.com
  3. Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C.
    Esquire at 261 Old York Road, Suite 423, Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C., PA 19046
    215.886.1900 · securitiesfraud@comcast.net
  4. 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
  5. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
    401 B Street, Suite 1700, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    206.749.5544 206.749.9978 · info@lerachlaw.com
  6. 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
  7. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
  8. Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
    330 Main Street, Schatz & Nobel, P.C., CT 06106
    800.797.5499 860.493.6290 · sn06106@AOL.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 07-CV-00238
JUDGE: Hon. James A. Parker
DATE FILED: 04/03/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/10/2004
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/30/2007
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Boca Raton)
    197 South Federal Highway, Suite 200, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33432
    561.750.3000 56.750.3364 · info@lerachlaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date