Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 05/26/2016 (Other)

Filing Date: September 30, 2010

According to a press release dated October 04, 2010, the complaint in this action alleges that, on October 2, 2007, in advance of a planned shareholder vote regarding the proposed merger of Transocean and GlobalSantaFe, Defendants disseminated a proxy statement to the Class that contained untrue statements of material facts and omitted to state material facts necessary to make the statements that were made not misleading in violation of §14(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder. Specifically, Transocean is alleged to have misrepresented the quality of its drilling fleet and its safety practices. In fact, as was first revealed by the Deepwater Horizon disaster and its aftermath, Transocean was dramatically underinvesting in safety and exposing itself to a high risk of a catastrophic event. The false proxy induced the Class to approve the merger with Transocean for inadequate consideration, thereby harming the Class.

According to the Order entered on January 7, 2011, the DeKalb-Bricklayers Group is appointed Lead Plaintiff in this action, pursuant to Section 21(D)(a)(3)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 USC § 78u-4(a)(3)(B), as amended by the PSLRA, and it is further. The Court approves the selection of the law firms Chitwood and Scott+Scott as Co-Lead Counsel for the Class, pursuant to Section 21 (D)(a)(3)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 USC § 78u-4(a)(3){B), as amended by the PSLRA. On April 7, 2011, the lead plaintiffs filed an Amended Class Action Complaint.

On April 07, 2011, an Amended Class Action Complaint was filed in the Southern District of New York by the lead plaintiffs against the defendants.

On March 30, 2012, the Court issued an order granting the defendants' motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint without prejudice. Plaintiffs were granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint by April 16, 2012. On April 16, 2012, the Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint.

On October 4, 2012, the Court issued an order denying the Defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint.

On March 11, 2013, an Opinion and Order was issued by the Court Granting the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss based on the time bar of statute of repose. Subsequently, the Clerk of Court was directed to close this case.

On May 26, 2016, the USCA for the Second Circuit issued a Mandate affirming the judgment of the District Court.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil Well Services & Equipment
Headquarters: Switzerland

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: RIG
Company Market: New York 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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 10-CV-07498
JUDGE: Hon. Laura Taylor Swain
DATE FILED: 09/30/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/02/2007
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/20/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
    P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut), CT 06415
    860.537.5537 860.537.4432 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
  2. Scott & Scott LLP (New York-Current)
    500 Fifth Avenue, 40th Floor, Scott & Scott LLP (New York-Current), NY 10110
    212.223.6444 212.223.6334 ·
  3. Scott & Scott LLP (Ohio)
    12434 Cedar Road, Suite 12, Scott & Scott LLP (Ohio), OH 44106
    216.229.6088 216.229.6088 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
  4. Scott & Scott LLP (San Diego)
    600 B Street, Suite 1500, Scott & Scott LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.233.4565 619.233.4565 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 10-CV-07498
JUDGE: Hon. Laura Taylor Swain
DATE FILED: 04/07/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/07/2007
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/20/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Chitwood Harley Harnes LLP (Atlanta)
    1230 Peachtree Street, N.E., 2300 Promenade II, Chitwood Harley Harnes LLP (Atlanta), GA 30309
    888.873.3999 404.873.4476 · info@chitwoodlaw.com
  2. Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
    P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut), CT 06415
    860.537.5537 860.537.4432 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
  3. Scott & Scott LLP (New York-Current)
    500 Fifth Avenue, 40th Floor, Scott & Scott LLP (New York-Current), NY 10110
    212.223.6444 212.223.6334 ·
  4. Scott & Scott LLP (Ohio)
    12434 Cedar Road, Suite 12, Scott & Scott LLP (Ohio), OH 44106
    216.229.6088 216.229.6088 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
No Document Title Filing Date