According to the law firm press release, Pier 1 is a retailer of decorative home furnishings and gifts imported from countries around the world. Pier 1 maintains over 1,000 stores in the United States and Canada and operates as one segment consisting of the retail sales of decorative home furnishing, furniture, gifts and related items.
The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose the truth regarding the Company’s business prospects and financial condition.
Approximately two weeks prior to its year end, on February 10, 2015, the Company surprised investors by reducing its financial guidance for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2015. Pier 1 blamed the sudden change in its outlook on softer than expected sales in January and February 2015 and "unplanned" expenses, primarily related to incremental supply chain costs. Pier 1 also announced that the Company's Chief Financial Officer had "retired". On this news, shares of Pier 1 plummeted to $12.84, or approximately 25%, on trading of over thirty-six million shares.
This first filed case was voluntarily dismissed on November 11, 2015. A related action continues under 15-CV-03415.
On April 25, 2016, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated Complaint on August 8. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the consolidated Complaint on October 21. On August 10, 2017, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff was given leave to file an amended Complaint.
Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on September 25. On November 22, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended Complaint. On June 25, 2018, the Court issued an Order dismissing the case with prejudice. On July 25, Lead Plaintiff filed a Notice appealing the Court's decision. On September 10, 2019, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the District Court.