On or around 04/21/2020 (Date of order of final judgment)
Filing Date: February 17, 2017
According to the law firm press release, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period Defendants issued materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Sito’s growth of bookings would not propel the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter 2016 media placement revenues and revenue growth to the level represented during the Class Period; (ii) Sito was aware that the election would impact the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter 2016 revenue, (iii) clients’ campaign spending and media placement revenues in the fourth quarter 2016 was highly dependent on the elections; (iv) the Company’s growth in media placement revenues would not occur in the fourth fiscal quarter 2016; (iv) as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s statements, as well as Defendants’ statements about Sito’s business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
On May 8, 2017, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on June 22. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended Complaint on September 1. On January 30, 2019, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part the Motion to Dismiss. On July 31, the parties entered into a Stipulation of Settlement. The Court issued an Order granting preliminary approval of the Settlement on November 7. On April 21, 2020, the Court granted final approval of the Settlement and entered Final Judgment.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: Sito Mobile Ltd.
Industry: Communications Equipment
Headquarters: United States
Ticker Symbol: SITO
Company Market: NASDAQ
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.