Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 06/20/2019 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: December 19, 2018

According to the Complaint, Dentsply Sirona designs, develops, manufactures and markets dental products and services for use by dentists. Dentsply Sirona is effectively the successor-in-interest to Dentsply Intl. and resulted from the merger of Dentsply Intl. and Sirona.

The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants falsely represented the drivers of the Company's financial performance. Specifically, Defendants attributed the Company's financial performance to the Company's "innovation," "operational improvement efforts," "new products," and "continued investments in sales and marketing" and told investors that these factors helped the Company succeed despite the "highly competitive" market for its products. In reality, the Company's financial results had been buoyed by an anticompetitive scheme among the Company's three primary distributors that suppressed competition in the dental supply market and artificially inflated the price of dental supplies sold by Dentsply.

On March 11, 2019, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on May 6.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Medical Equipment & Supplies
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: XRAY
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: E.D. New York
DOCKET #: 18-CV-07253
JUDGE:
DATE FILED: 12/19/2018
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/20/2014
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/07/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New New York)
  2. Klausner, Kaufman, Jensen & Levinson
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. New York
DOCKET #: 18-CV-07253
JUDGE:
DATE FILED: 05/06/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/20/2014
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/07/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Barrack, Rodos & Bacine (New York)
    1350 Broadway, Suite 1001, Barrack, Rodos & Bacine (New York), NY 10018
    212.688.0782 212.688.0782 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available