Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 09/25/2014 (Other)

Filing Date: August 06, 2014

According to the Complaint, on May 2, 2012, Defendants caused to be filed a Form S-1MEF with the SEC in which
they announced their Offering of 18.5 million trust units at $20 per share.

The Complaint alleges that the Registration Statement made false and misleading statements concerning the Company's (1) capital expenditures and (2) hedge contracts expiration. In addition, in violation of Item 303 of Regulation S-K, under the applicable SEC rules and regulations, Defendants failed to disclose material facts concerning these issues.

On September 18, 2013, PCOT announced its Secondary Offering in which PCEC and other selling unitholders (including certain Board representatives) offered an aggregate of 13.5 million trust units. The Secondary Registration Statement made false and misleading statements concerning the Company's (1) capital expenditures and (2) hedge contracts expiration. In addition, under the applicable SEC rules and regulations, in violation of Item 303 of Regulation S-K, Defendants failed to disclose material facts concerning these issues.

On September 24, 2013, five days after the Secondary Offering, the Company announced its October 2013 cash distribution, in which it significantly lowered its monthly distribution due to increased capital expenditures and lower average realized oil prices. As the extent of these problems became public, the price of PCOT trust units declined dramatically.

On September 16, 2014, the Court issued an Order remanding this action back to state court.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil & Gas - Integrated
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ROYT
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 14-CV-06170
JUDGE: Hon. George H. King
DATE FILED: 08/06/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/02/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/01/2014
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Scott + Scott LLP (NY)
    405 Lexington Avenue, 40th Floor, The Chrysler Building, Scott + Scott LLP (NY), NY 10174
    (212) 223-6444 (212) 223-6444 ·
  2. Zeldes Haeggquist & Eck, LLP
    625 Broadway, Suite 1000, Zeldes Haeggquist & Eck, LLP, CA 92101
    619.378.0442 619.342.7878 ·
No Document Title Filing Date