Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 04/23/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: November 08, 2019

According to the Complaint, Resideo Technologies, Inc. purports to be a global provider of products, software, solutions, and technologies that help homeowners stay connected and in control of their comfort, security, and energy use.

The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants made false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose adverse information regarding Resideo’s business and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants failed to disclose that the negative operational effects of the spin-off were more substantial and persistent than disclosed and had negatively affected the Company’s product sales, supply chain, and gross margins, putting Resideo’s fiscal 2019 financial forecasts at risk, and that, as a consequence, the Company’s financial guidance lacked a reasonable basis and the Company was not on track to make its fiscal 2019 guidance as Defendants had claimed.

On January 27, 2020, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases and appointing Lead Plaintiffs and Counsel. Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended Complaint on April 10.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Security Systems & Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: REZI
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: D. Minnesota
DOCKET #: 19-CV-02863
JUDGE: Hon. Wilhelmina M. Wright
DATE FILED: 11/08/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/29/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/22/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (New SF Office)
  2. VanOverbeke Michaud & Timmony, P.C.
  3. Zimmerman Reed, LLP
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Minnesota
DOCKET #: 19-CV-02863
JUDGE: Hon. Wilhelmina M. Wright
DATE FILED: 04/10/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/29/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/06/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Chestnut Cambronne PA (MN)
  2. Entwistle & Cappucci LLP (Austin)
  3. Labaton Sucharow LLP
  4. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (New SF Office)
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available