Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 08/04/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: February 12, 2020

According to the Complaint, Six Flags is the world’s largest regional theme park operator, with more than two dozen parks across North America. In addition to generating revenue through the operation of its parks in North America, Six Flags also earns revenue pursuant to international licensing agreements to assist third parties in the development and management of Six Flags-branded parks outside of North America.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and growth prospects related to its agreements with Riverside Investment Group Co. Ltd. to develop parks in China. As development of those parks began to face delays, the Complaint alleges that Defendants misled investors by downplaying the problems as "short-term" and "not material in the context of the long-term opportunity."

On March 2, 2020, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases. Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on March 20. The Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel on May 8. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on July 2.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Recreational Activities
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: SIX
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: N.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 20-CV-00201
JUDGE: Hon. Mark Pittman
DATE FILED: 02/12/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/25/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/09/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New New York)
  2. McKool Smith PC
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 20-CV-00201
JUDGE: Hon. Mark Pittman
DATE FILED: 03/20/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/25/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/19/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New New York)
  2. McKool Smith PC
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date