Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 06/13/2017 (Stipulation and order of dismissal (voluntary dismissal))

Filing Date: March 27, 2017

According to the Complaint, on February 10, 2017, Mead Johnson issued a press release announcing that it had entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) to sell Mead Johnson to Reckitt Benckiser. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Reckitt Benckiser will acquire all outstanding shares of Mead Johnson for $90.00 in cash (the “Merger Consideration”). The Proposed Transaction is valued at approximately $17.9 billion.

The Complaint alleges on March 13, 2017, Mead Johnson filed a Preliminary Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A (the “Proxy”) with the SEC in connection with the Proposed Transaction. The Proxy, which recommends that Mead Johnson stockholders vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction, omits or misrepresents material information concerning, among other things: (i) Mead Johnson management’s projections, including the projections utilized by the Company’s financial advisors, Goldman, Sachs & Co. (“Goldman Sachs”) and Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
(“Morgan Stanley”), in their financial analyses; (ii) the valuation analyses prepared by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley in connection with the rendering of their fairness opinions; and (iii) material information concerning the background of the process leading up to the Proposed Transaction.

This action was voluntarily dismissed on June 13, 2017.


Sector: Consumer Non-Cyclical
Industry: Food Processing
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: MJN
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. Delaware
DOCKET #: 17-CV-00325
JUDGE: Hon. Leonard P. Stark
DATE FILED: 03/27/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/27/2017
  1. Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.
  2. WeissLaw LLP
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available