Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 01/04/2019 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: October 04, 2018

Plaintiff's law firm issued a press release on October 4, 2018, announcing the lawsuit. According to the press release, Adient designs, engineers, and manufactures automotive seating for all vehicle classes and all major original equipment manufacturers and is one of the largest global automotive seating suppliers in the world.

The Complaint alleges that from the date of its formation, Adient and certain of its senior executives highlighted improvements in the efficiency of the Company’s capital-intensive metals business (a/k/a the SS&M business) as a key driver of its success. For example, Defendants repeatedly emphasized to investors that the Company was “solidly on track” to deliver 200-basis-point margin expansion by 2020, which was dependent in large part on operational and financial improvements in Adient’s core SS&M business. This statement and others were materially false and misleading, omitted information reasonable investors would consider important, and/or lacked a reasonable basis because, unbeknownst to investors, Adient’s core SS&M business faced significant operational problems such that the repeatedly touted 200-basis-point margin expansion was not “on track” at any point during the Class Period. As a result of Defendants’ false statements and/or omissions, Adient securities traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.

On December 21, 2018, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases and appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel.


Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Auto & Truck Parts
Headquarters: Ireland


Ticker Symbol: ADNT
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 #: 18-CV-09116
JUDGE: Hon. Ronnie Abrams
DATE FILED: 10/04/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/11/2018
  1. Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (Berkeley)
    715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (Berkeley), CA 94710
    510.725.3000 510.725.3000 ·
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville)
    58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available