Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 09/18/2018 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: December 15, 2017

According to the Complaint, Aqua Metals was purportedly formed to engage in the business of recycling lead through a novel process called “AquaRefining.” The Company claims that it has focused its efforts on developing and testing the AquaRefining process, developing a business plan, raising working capital, and developing its initial lead acid battery, or LAB, recycling facility in the Tahoe Regional Industrial Center, in McCarran, Nevada.

According to the law firm press release, the complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that Aqua Metals’ breaking and separating process was facing substantial obstacles due to AquaRefining’s need for a much higher degree of separation than is normal in the industry; (2) that the Company’s breaking and separating process was not operating reliably or efficiently; (3) that the breaking and separating obstacles and issues were negatively impacting the Company’s output; (4) that the Company’s four “operating modules” were being used primarily for experimentation, rather than production; (5) that module operators were assisting with lead removal; (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, the ramp up of the Company’s recycling process was being significantly hindered and delayed; and (7) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ statements about Aqua Metals’ business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On March 29, 2018, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases. The consolidated cases shall be identified as "In Re Aqua Metals, Inc. Securities Litigation." On May 23, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel.

Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated Complaint on July 20, 2018.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Waste Management Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: AQMS
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 17-CV-07142
JUDGE: Hon. Haywood S Gilliam, Jr
DATE FILED: 12/15/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/09/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/09/2017
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP
    1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 , Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, CA 90067
    (310) 201-9150 (310) 432-1495 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 17-CV-07142
JUDGE: Hon. Haywood S Gilliam, Jr
DATE FILED: 07/20/2018
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/19/2016
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/09/2017
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman Tabacco
    44 Montgomery Street Suite 650, Berman Tabacco, CA 94104
    415.433.3200 415.433.6382 ·
  2. Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford)
    733 Summer Street, Suite 304, Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford), CT 06901
    203-992-4523 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available