Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 10/02/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: March 10, 2020

According to the Complaint, Funko, Inc. is a pop culture consumer products company that creates figures, plush, accessories, apparel, and homewares regarding movies, TV shows, videogames, musicians, and sports teams.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that Funko was experiencing lower than expected sales; (2) that, as a result, Funko was reasonably likely to incur a writedown for slower moving inventory; and (3) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On June 11, 2020, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases and appointing Lead Plaintiffs and Counsel. Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended Complaint on July 31.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Apparel/Accessories
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: FNKO
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 20-CV-02319
JUDGE: Hon. Virginia A. Phillips
DATE FILED: 03/10/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/31/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/05/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 20-CV-02319
JUDGE: Hon. Virginia A. Phillips
DATE FILED: 07/31/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/08/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/05/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Liebhard LLP (New York)
  2. Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC (New York)
  3. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available