Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 04/10/2019 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: March 07, 2019

According to the Complaint, this action stems from a proposed transaction announced on February 12, 2019 (the “Proposed Transaction”), pursuant to which CAS Medical Systems, Inc. (“CAS Medical” or the “Company”) will be acquired by Edwards Lifesciences Corporation and its affiliates (together, “Edwards”). On February 11, 2019, CAS Medical’s Board of Directors (the “Board” or “Individual Defendants”) caused the Company to enter into an agreement and plan of merger (the “Merger Agreement”) with Edwards Lifesciences Holding, Inc. and Crown Merger Sub, Inc. Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, CAS Medical’s stockholders will receive $2.45 in cash for each share of CAS Medical common stock they hold. On March 1, 2019, defendants filed a proxy statement (the “Proxy Statement”) with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) in connection with the Proposed Transaction.

The Complaint alleges the Proxy Statement omits material information with respect to the Proposed Transaction, which renders the Proxy Statement false and misleading. Accordingly, plaintiff alleges that defendants violated Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “1934 Act”) in connection with the Proxy Statement.

This case was voluntarily dismissed on April 10, 2019.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CASM
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. Delaware
DOCKET #: 19-CV-00478
JUDGE: Hon. Maryellen Noreika
DATE FILED: 03/07/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/12/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/07/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. (Wilmington)
  2. RM Law, P.C.
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available