Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 01/13/2010 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: July 14, 2008

The complaint is against the company and certain officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. CompuCredit provides credit and related financial services and products to underserved and un-banked consumers.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and financial results. As a result of defendants' false statements, CompuCredit stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching its Class Period high of $40.61 per share in December 2006.

Then, on June 10, 2008, The Wall Street Journal reported that federal regulators were expected to seek more than $100 million in fines and restitution against CompuCredit related to deceptive credit-card marketing tactics and abusive debt-collection practices. On this news, CompuCredit's stock dropped $2.49 per share to close at $6.30 per share on June 10, 2008, a one-day decline of 28% on
extremely high volume.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) the Company's assets contained millions of dollars worth of impaired and risky securities, many of which were backed by loans to subprime borrowers; (b) the Company was not adequately accounting for its provision for loan losses in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, causing its financial results to be materially misstated; (c) the Company's improper marketing and collection practices would lead to large fines and would harm the Company's future results; (d) the company had far greater exposure to anticipated losses and defaults related to its subprime customers than it had previously disclosed; (e) given the deterioration in the market for asset-backed securities related to subprime consumers, the Company would be forced to reduce its lending operations due to liquidity concerns as it relied upon the sale of its asset-backed securities to fund its ongoing operations; and (f) given the increased volatility in the subprime market and increased level of delinquencies and defaults that CompuCredit was experiencing, the Company had no reasonable basis to make projections about its financial results.

On October 22, 2008, Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. granted the motion to consolidate two related actions and further granted the motion to appoint the City of Pontiac General Employees' Retirement System as lead plaintiff and Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP and Holzer Holzer & Fistel LLC as co-lead counsel. On December 24, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint. On March 18, 2009, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss a Consolidated Class Action Complaint. On December 4, 2009, Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The plaintiff had 30 days to file an amended complaint. On January 13, 2010, the case was dismissed with prejudice and the civil case was terminated.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Misc. Financial Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CCRT
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. Georgia
DOCKET #: 08-CV-02270
JUDGE: Hon. Marvin H. Shoob
DATE FILED: 07/14/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/06/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/09/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 · info@csgrr.com/
  2. Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC (former Atlanta)
    1117 Perimeter Center West, Suite E-107, Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC (former Atlanta), GA 30338
    770.392.0090 770.392.0090 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. Georgia
DOCKET #: 08-CV-02270
JUDGE: Hon. Marvin H. Shoob
DATE FILED: 12/24/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/04/2004
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/10/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Atlanta)
    3424 Peachtree Road, NE, Suite 1650, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Atlanta), GA 30326
    404.504.6500 404.504.6500 ·
  2. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Boca Raton)
    120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33432
    561.750.3000 561.750.3000 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date