Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 03/06/2012 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: May 26, 2011

According to a press release dated May 26, 2011, the complaint charges Yongye and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yongye, through its primary operating subsidiary, Yongye Nongfeng Biotechnology Co., Ltd., which is a 95% owned subsidiary of Yongye, engages in the manufacturing, research and development and sale of fulvic acid-based liquid and powder nutrient compounds used in the agriculture industry in the People’s Republic of China.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business practices and financial results. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose that the Company’s financial results were inflated and were inconsistent with Yongye’s production capabilities. As a result of defendants’ false statements, Yongye stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $9.09 per share on November 8, 2010.

On May 9, 2011, Yongye issued a press release announcing its first quarter 2011 financial results. The Company reported revenue of $50.2 million and net income of $8.4 million, or $0.16 diluted earnings per share. Then on May 11, 2011, Seeking Alpha issued an article entitled “Yongye International’s Reported Production: SEC Filings Raise Red Flags.” The article stated in part “that the company and its joint-venture partner could not have produced, and therefore sold, the reported plant product tonnages given the company’s stated manufacturing capacity and shipments.” On this news, Yongye’s stock fell to $4.85 per share on May 12, 2011, from $5.19 per share on May 10, 2011.

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) Yongye’s financial results reported to the SEC and investors were inconsistent with the Company’s ability to produce the tonnage reported as shipments of sales; (b) Yongye’s reported financial statements were grossly inflated by including revenue it had not earned; and (c) Yongye’s business was not growing at the rate represented by defendants.

On September 23, 2011, the Court issued an order consolidating several complaints under the current docket, appointed lead plaintiff, approved of lead counsel, and re-titled the case In re Yongye International, Inc. Securities Litigation.

On December 12, 2011, the Lead Plaintiffs filed an Amended Consolidated Complaint for violations of the federal securities laws.

On March 6, 2012, Noticed was filed that Lead Plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss the Action with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Chemical Manufacturing
Headquarters: China

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: YONG
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 11-CV-03616
JUDGE: Hon.Richard J. Sullivan
DATE FILED: 05/26/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/11/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/11/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Curtis V. Trinko LLP
    16 West 46th Street 7th Floor, Curtis V. Trinko LLP, NY 10036
    212.490.9550 212.986.0158 · ctrinko@trinko.com
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
  3. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville)
    58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 11-CV-03616
JUDGE: Hon.Richard J. Sullivan
DATE FILED: 12/12/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/11/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/19/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville)
    58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
No Document Title Filing Date