Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 11/10/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: May 12, 2017

According to the law firm press release, United Technologies is a manufacturer and servicer of high-technology products, including aircraft components, elevators, escalators, air-conditioning units, and military-missile systems. The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants violated provisions of the Exchange Act by issuing and reaffirming unfounded and inflated earnings guidance, primarily based on the planning assumptions in two of the Company’s key business units: UTC Aerospace Systems (“UTAS”) and Otis Elevator Co. (“Otis”). Defendants’ Class Period representations were materially false and misleading because Defendants failed to disclose or indicate that United Technologies’ earnings forecast relied on planning assumptions for the UTAS and Otis units that were not fully scrutinized and were far too aggressive.

On July 21, 2015, the Company cut its 2015 earnings guidance on the basis of weak performance by the UTAS and Otis units. In reaction to these revelations, UTX stock lost hundreds of millions of dollars in market capitalization, with the Company’s stock price falling from a Class Period high of $119.14 per share on May 14, 2015, to close at $102.71 per share on July 21, 2015.

On October 11, 2017, the Court appointed Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on November 10.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Capital Goods
Industry: Aerospace & Defense
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: UTX
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 17-CV-03570
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 05/12/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/21/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/20/2015
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 17-CV-03570
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 11/10/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/11/2014
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/20/2015
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP (Pennsylvania)
    280 King of Prussia Road, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP (Pennsylvania), PA 19087
    610.667.7706 610.667.7706 · info@ktmc.com
  2. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
No Document Title Filing Date