Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 09/01/2015 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: April 01, 2011

According to the Press Release dated April 1, 2011, the Complaint asserts violations of the federal securities laws against China Intelligent, its officers and directors, and underwriters for issuing materially false and misleading information in the Company's public offering documents. On March 29, 2011 the Company issued an announcement revealing that its auditor MaloneBailey LLP ("MB") had resigned and that MB had withdrawn its prior audit opinion of the Company's financial statements. MB said it "believed that the accounting records of the Company have been falsified, which constitutes an illegal act." MB also found that the accounting discrepancies could indicate a material error in previously issued financial statements. MB also stated that it could no longer rely on management's representations. The Company also disclosed that it is the subject of a formal SEC investigation.

Since March 24, 2011 trading in the Company's stock has been halted, rendering the Company's stock illiquid and damaging investors.

A similar, purported class action complaint was also filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.

On July 7, 2011, the Court issued an order appointing Perritt Emerging Opportunities Fund, and Universal Invest Quality SICAV, Acerco SA, and Antoine de Sejournet
18 (collectively, the de Sejournet Funds”) co-lead plaintiffs. Additionally, Gold Bennett Cera & Sidener LLP and the Rosen Law Firm P.A. were approved as co-lead counsel.

On September 6, 2011, the lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint.

On February 16, 2012, the Court issued an Order dismissing the Consolidated Amended Complaint with leave to amend. In addition, certain individual defendants were dismissed from this action without prejudice.

On March 16, 2012, the lead Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint.

On June 4, 2012, the Court issued an Order granting plaintiff's motion to consolidate. Neal North v. China Intelligent Lighting & Electronics, Inc., et al., CV 12-2094 PSG (SSx) is consolidated with In re China Intelligent Lighting & Electronics, Inc. Securities Litigation, CV 11-2768 PSG (SSx). The clerk is directed to administratively close Neal North v. China Intelligent Lighting & Electronics, Inc., et al., CV 12-2094 PSG (SSx). All future filings shall be made on the docket of In re China Intelligent Lighting & Electronics, Inc. Securities Litigation, CV 11-2768 PSG (SSx)

On September 5, 2012, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' motions to dismiss. The Court granted the motions to dismiss of certain individual defendants without prejudice. The motions to dismiss were denied in all other respects.

On October 25, 2013, the Court issued an Order granting Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.

On June 26, 2014, the lead plaintiffs and certain defendants entered into a Stipulation of Settlement. This Settlement was preliminarily approved by the Court on September 9th.

On September 18, 2014, default judgment was entered against the issuer defendant.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Electronic Instruments & Controls
Headquarters: China

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CIL
Company Market: Amex Emerging Co.
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-02768
JUDGE: Hon. Philip S. Gutierrez
DATE FILED: 04/01/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/18/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/29/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
    333 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A., CA 90071
    213.785.2610 213.226-4684 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-02768
JUDGE: Hon. Philip S. Gutierrez
DATE FILED: 09/06/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/18/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/24/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Gold Bennett Cera & Sidener LLP
    595 Market Street, Suite 2300, Gold Bennett Cera & Sidener LLP, CA 94105-2835
    800.778.1822 415.777.5189 · info@gbcsf.com
  2. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
    333 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A., CA 90071
    213.785.2610 213.226-4684 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date