Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 03/06/2014 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: November 12, 2012

According to the law firm press release, the complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s financial performance and future prospects. In particular, the complaint alleges that the nature and ongoing viability of the strong results being reported for ViSalus, Inc., a multilevel weight loss marketing company the Company owns a controlling interest in, were being overstated, and that this was masking declining performance in the Company’s other operating units and product lines.

The complaint alleges that beginning with a September 21, 2012 Moody’s Investors Services cut in its outlook for the Company, the market began to learn through a series of partial disclosures ending on November 6, 2012, that the Company’s financial soundness and business metrics were not as they had been represented during the Class Period. As Blyth’s stock price was pummeled with each of these revelations, more than $462 million in market capitalization was simply erased.

On February 5, 2013, the court issued an Order appointing lead plaintiff and approving the selection of lead counsel. On April 12, 2013, the lead plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Consumer Non-Cyclical
Industry: Personal & Household Products
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: BTH
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: D. Connecticut
DOCKET #: 12-CV-01597
JUDGE: Hon. Vanessa L. Bryant
DATE FILED: 11/12/2012
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/14/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/06/2012
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Diserio Martin O'Connor & Castiglioni LLP
    1 Atlantic Street, Diserio Martin O'Connor & Castiglioni LLP, CT 06901
    203.358.0800 203.348.2321 ·
  2. Law Offices of Alfred G. Yates
    519 Alleghany Bldg., 429 Forbes Avenue, Law Offices of Alfred G. Yates, PA 15219
    412.391.5164 ·
  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: D. Connecticut
DOCKET #: 12-CV-01597
JUDGE: Hon. Vanessa L. Bryant
DATE FILED: 07/02/2013
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/13/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/06/2012
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Diserio Martin O'Connor & Castiglioni LLP
    1 Atlantic Street, Diserio Martin O'Connor & Castiglioni LLP, CT 06901
    203.358.0800 203.348.2321 ·
  2. 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