On or around 06/16/2017 (Court's order of dismissal)
Filing Date: April 26, 2017
According to the Complaint, on April 10, 2017, RetailMeNot’s Board of Directors (the “Board” or “Individual Defendants”) caused the Company to enter into an agreement and plan of merger (the “Merger Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, Harland Clarke commenced a tender offer, currently set to expire on May 22, 2017, and stockholders of RetailMeNot will receive $11.60 per share in cash.
On April 24, 2017, defendants filed a Solicitation/Recommendation Statement (the “Solicitation Statement”) with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in connection with the Proposed Transaction. The Complaint alleges the Solicitation Statement omits material information with respect to the Proposed Transaction, which renders the Solicitation Statement false and misleading.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: RetailMeNot, Inc.
Industry: Business Services
Headquarters: United States
Ticker Symbol: SALE
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.
First Identified Complaint
Louis Scarantino, et al. v. RetailMeNot, Inc., et al.