| Case Page

 | Case Page |

Case Page

 

Primero Mining Corp.

Case Summary

Primero Mining Corp. Securities Litigation

Case Summary

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 09/18/2017 (Other)

Filing Date: February 15, 2016

According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period Defendants issued false and misleading statements to investors and/or failed to disclose material facts about tax compliance at Primero’s Mexican subsidiary, Primero Empresa Minera, S.A. de C.V. On February 3, 2016, Primero disclosed that its Mexican subsidiary received a legal claim from the Mexican tax authorities, Servicio de Administración Tributaria (“SAT”), seeking to nullify the Advance Pricing Agreement issued by SAT in 2012. On this news, shares of Primero Mining fell $0.74 per share or over 28% to close at $1.89 per share on February 4, 2016.

On May 12, 2016, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiffs, Lead Counsel, and also consolidating related cases. Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on August 22.

The Court granted Defendants' Motion to Dismiss without prejudice on January 30, 2017. An amended complaint was filed on February 27. A corrected version of this Complaint was filed on March 10.

The Court ordered this case dismissed without prejudice on July 14, 2017. Plaintiffs declined to file an amended complaint, thus the case was dismissed with prejudice on August 9. Plaintiffs appealed this decision on September 8.

Company & Securities Information

Defendant: Primero Mining Corp.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Gold & Silver
Headquarters: Canada

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: PPP
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.

First Identified Complaint

Patrick Loftus, et al. v. Primero Mining Corp., et al.

COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 16-CV-01034
JUDGE: Hon. Beverly Reid O'Connell
DATE FILED: 02/15/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/05/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/03/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New Los Angeles)
    355 South Grand Ave, Suite 2450, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New Los Angeles), CA 90071
    (213) 785-2610 (213) 226-4684 ·
First Identified Complaint (FIC) Filings:
No Document Title Filing Date
1 Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws 02/15/2016
2 U.S. District Court Civil Docket 02/17/2016

Reference Complaint

Patrick Loftus, et al. v. Primero Mining Corp., et al.

COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 16-CV-01034
JUDGE: Hon. Beverly Reid O'Connell
DATE FILED: 03/10/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/05/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/03/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York)
    685 3rd Avenue 26th Floor, Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York), NY
    212..983.9330 212..983.9331 ·
Reference Complaint (REF) Filings:
No Document Title Filing Date
1 Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint 08/22/2016
2 Order Re Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 01/30/2017
3 First Amended Class Action Complaint 02/27/2017
4 First Amended Class Action Complaint 03/10/2017
5 Order Re Defendants' Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint and Lead Plaintiffs' Motion to Partially Lift the PSLRA Discovery Stay to Obtain Contact Information [92,93] 07/14/2017
6 Final Judgment of Dismissal 08/09/2017
7 Notice of Appeal 09/08/2017
8 U.S. District Court Civil Docket 09/18/2017
 
 

Cases