According to the law firm press release, the Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the third quarter and full year 2015 revenue and net income guidance issued during the Company's second quarter 2015 earnings announcement and subsequent conference call were materially false and misleading in that the projections were unattainable; (ii) the fourth quarter and full year 2015 revenue and net income guidance issued during the Company's third quarter 2015 earnings announcement and subsequent conference call were materially false and misleading in that the projections were unattainable; (iii) Defendants intentionally failed to timely disclose the Company's challenges with its largest China distributor; (iv) Defendant and an entity controlled by Defendant, with full knowledge of the undisclosed materially adverse facts alleged herein, embarked on a selling spree of personal holdings of SKUL common stock at artificially inflated prices, which sales they made without first disclosing these adverse material facts known to Defendants and withheld from the market, which permitted them to engage in unusual insider selling and realize proceeds in excess of $4 million; and (v) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' statements about SKUL's business, operations, and prospects were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
An amended Complaint was filed on May 8, 2017. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended Complaint on July 7. On March 21, 2018, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff was given leave to file an amended Complaint. On June 22, the Court issued an Order entering judgment in favor of the Defendants, dismissing the case with prejudice.