According to a press release dated February 09, 2011, the complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s true financial condition, business and prospects. Specifically, the complaint alleges: (a) that the Company was experiencing declining demand for its products and services, especially in the Singapore and Rotterdam ports; (b) that the Company was reducing its prices in competitive markets, which had a significant impact on its profit margins; (c) that the Company’s acquisition of Verbeke Bunkering N.V. was not performing according to internal expectations; and (d) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects.
On August 11, 2010, Aegean Marine announced its financial results for the second quarter of 2010, the period ended June 30, 2010. For the quarter, the Company reported net income of $12.0 million, and total revenues of $1,336.6 million. In reaction to the Company’s second quarter financial results, the price of Aegean Marine stock fell $3.40 per share, or 18%, to close at $15.65 per share, on heavy trading volume.
On November 10, 2010, Aegean Marine announced its financial results for the third quarter of 2010, the period ended September 30, 2010. For the quarter, the Company reported net income of $4.6 million, and total revenues of$1,340.0 million. In reaction to this announcement, the price of Aegean Marine stock fell $5.68 per share, or 36%, to close at $10.28 per share, on heavy trading volume.
Then, on February 3, 2011, the Company announced its preliminary financial results for the fourth quarter of 2010. For the quarter, the Company expected to report a net loss of between $12.0 million and $13.0 million. In reaction to the continuous decrease in demand for the Company’s products and services, the price of Aegean Marine stock fell $2.22 per share, or 20%, to close at $8.68 per share, on heavy trading volume.
On May 19, 2011, Dino Tesis was appointed lead plaintiff and of his selection of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP and Holzer, Holzer & Fistel LLC as lead counsel was approved.
According to the Notice filed on July 28, 2011, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff(s) and or their counsel(s), hereby give notice that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed, without prejudice against the defendant(s) All Defendants.