Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 04/21/2017 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: February 16, 2017

According to the Complaint, on November 3, 2016, Metaldyne issued a press release announcing that it had entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) to sell Metaldyne to American Axle. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Metaldyne stockholders will receive $13.50 in cash and 0.5 shares of American Axle common stock with a value of $11.75 for each share of Metaldyne common stock they own (the “Merger Consideration”). The Proposed Transaction is valued at approximately $1.6 billion.

On December 19, 2016, Metaldyne and American Axle filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) a joint Registration Statement on Form S-4, which was subsequently amended on January 27, 2017 (the “Registration Statement”) in connection with the Proposed Transaction. The Complaint alleges the Registration Statement, which recommends that Metaldyne stockholders vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction, omits or misrepresents material information concerning, among other things: (i) Metaldyne management’s projections, utilized by the Company’s financial advisor, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (“BofA Merrill Lynch”), in its financial analyses; (ii) the valuation analyses prepared by BofA Merrill Lynch in connection with the rendering of its fairness opinion; and (iii) material information concerning the background of the process leading up to the Proposed Transaction.

This case was voluntarily dismissed on April 21, 2017.


Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Auto & Truck Parts
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: MPG
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: E.D. Michigan
DOCKET #: 17-CV-10508
JUDGE: Hon.Mark A. Goldsmith
DATE FILED: 02/16/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/16/2017
  1. MacWilliams Law PC
  2. WeissLaw LLP
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available