Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

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

Filing Date: February 20, 2020

According to the Complaint, Cincinnati Bell Inc. delivers integrated communications solutions to residential and business customers over its fiber-optic and copper networks including high-speed internet, video, voice, and data.

This action stems from a proposed transaction announced on December 23, 2019, pursuant to which Cincinnati Bell Inc. will be acquired by institutional partners of Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P.

On December 21, 2019, Cincinnati Bell’s Board of Directorscaused the Company to enter into an agreement and plan of merger with Charlie AcquireCo Inc. (“Parent”), a Delaware corporation, and Charlie Merger Sub Inc. (“Merger Sub,” and together with Parent, “Charlie”). Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, Cincinnati Bell’s stockholders will receive $10.50 in cash for each share of Cincinnati Bell common stock they own.

On February 4, 2020, Defendants filed a proxy statement with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the Proposed Transaction. The Complaint alleges that the Proxy Statement omits material information with respect to the Proposed Transaction, which renders the Proxy Statement false and misleading.

This case was voluntarily dismissed on March 23, 2020. A related case continues in the Southern District of New York under Docket 20-CV-01607.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Communications Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CBB
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. Delaware
DOCKET #: 20-CV-00244
JUDGE: Hon. Colm F. Connolly
DATE FILED: 02/20/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/23/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/20/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. (Wilmington)
  2. RM Law, P.C. (Berwyn)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 20-CV-01607
JUDGE: Hon. Colm F. Connolly
DATE FILED: 02/24/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/23/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/20/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York)
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available