Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

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

Filing Date: November 06, 2018

According to the Complaint, Evoqua purports to be a leading provider of mission critical water treatment solutions,
offering services, systems and technologies to support our customers’ full water lifecycle needs. With over 200,000 installations worldwide, the Company holds leading positions in the industrial, commercial and municipal water treatment markets in North America. Evoqua offers a portfolio of differentiated, proprietary technology solutions sold under a number of brands. Evoqua claims that the customer intimacy created through its service network is a significant competitive advantage.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Evoqua failed to successfully integrate its prior acquisitions; (ii) Evoqua was experiencing supply chain disruptions influenced by tariffs and an extended delay on a large aquatics project; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, Evoqua’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On January 31, 2019, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated Complaint on April 3.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: AQUA
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-10320
JUDGE: Hon. Alison J. Nathan
DATE FILED: 11/06/2018
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/06/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/30/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Holzer & Holzer, LLC
  2. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 18-CV-10320
JUDGE: Hon. Alison J. Nathan
DATE FILED: 04/03/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/06/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/30/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New New York)
    1251 Avenue of the Americas, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New New York), NY 10020
    (212) 554-1400 (212) 554-1448 ·
  2. Klausner, Kaufman, Jensen & Levinson
    10059 Northwest 1st Court, Klausner, Kaufman, Jensen & Levinson, FL 33324
    954.916.1202 954.916.1232 ·
  3. Scott + Scott LLP (NY)
    405 Lexington Avenue, 40th Floor, The Chrysler Building, Scott + Scott LLP (NY), NY 10174
    (212) 223-6444 (212) 223-6444 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available