Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 03/11/2009 (Date of stipulation and/or agreement of settlement)

Filing Date: October 10, 2006

Motion for preliminary approval of settlement was filed on March 11, 2009. The agreement includes a cash payment of $1,250,000 in exchange for dismissal of claims against the defendants. Counsel is seeking 1/3 of the settlement fund in attorneys' fees, and reimbursement of $30,000 in expenses.

Plaintiffs moved to certify the class on January 28, 2008. The motion was denied without prejudice on September 18, 2008.

Plaintiffs filed a motion for consolidation and the appointment lead plaintiff and lead counsel on December 21, 2006. The next day the defendants filed motions to dismiss the unconsolidated complaint. Before a ruling on the dismissal motion, plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on February 1, 2007. Lead counsel was appointed February 21, 2007 and defendants filed a renewed motion for dismissal on March 1, 2007. The motion was denied on September 18, 2007.

According to a press release dated October 13, 2006, the company, together with certain of its executive officers, have been named as defendants in a purported securities class action suit. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the company and the other defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Capital Goods
Industry: Misc. Capital Goods
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: PRST
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: D. New Hampshire
DOCKET #: 06-CV-00377
JUDGE: Magistrate Judge James R. Muirhead
DATE FILED: 10/10/2006
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/27/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/29/2006
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP (Boston)
    75 State Street, Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP (Boston), MA 02109
    617.439.3939 617.439.0134 · info@shulaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. New Hampshire
DOCKET #: 06-CV-00377
JUDGE: Magistrate Judge James R. Muirhead
DATE FILED: 02/01/2007
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/27/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/28/2006
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP (Boston)
    75 State Street, Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP (Boston), MA 02109
    617.439.3939 617.439.0134 · info@shulaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date