Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 08/04/2017 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: May 18, 2017

According to the Complaint, on April 17, 2017, the Company announced that it had entered into an agreement and plan of merger (the “Merger Agreement”), dated April 16, 2017, by which Parent, through its wholly owned subsidiary AMETEK Atom, Inc., (the “Merger Sub,” and together with Parent, “AMETEK”) will acquire all of the outstanding shares of MOCON in an all-cash transaction (the “Proposed Transaction”). If consummated, MOCON stockholders will receive $30.00 in cash for each share of MOCON stock that they own (“Merger Consideration”). The Proposed Transaction was valued at approximately $182 million at the time of the announcement.

The Complaint alleges on April 28, 2017, defendants issued materially incomplete and misleading disclosures in the Schedule 14A Information Statement (the “Proxy Statement”) filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in connection with the Proposed Transaction. The Proxy Statement materially misleading in that it fails to provide adequate disclosure of material information related to the Proposed Transaction.

On June 29, 2017, Plaintiff filed a stipulation to voluntarily dismiss this action. The Court granted an Order of Dismissal without prejudice on July 5.


Sector: Technology
Industry: Scientific & Technical Instr.
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: MOCO
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.
COURT: D. Minnesota
DOCKET #: 17-CV-01662
JUDGE: Hon. Joan N. Ericksen
DATE FILED: 05/18/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/18/2017
  1. Hellmuth & Johnson, P.A.
  2. Levi & Korsinsky LLP (DC)
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available