Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 04/22/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: April 21, 2020

According to the Complaint, Opus Bank provides commercial and retail banking products and solutions to its clients in western markets from its headquarters in Irvine, California and through forty-six banking offices, including twenty-eight in California, sixteen in the Seattle/Puget Sound region in Washington, one in the Phoenix metropolitan area of Arizona, and one in Portland, Oregon.

This action stems from a proposed transaction announced on February 3, 2020, pursuant to which Opus Bank will be acquired by Pacific Premier Bancorp, Inc. (“Pacific Premier”), a Delaware corporation, and Pacific Premier Bank.

On January 31, 2020, Opus’s Board of Directors caused the Company to enter into an agreement and plan of merger with Pacific Premier and Pacific Premier Bank. Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, shareholders of Opus will receive 0.90 shares of Pacific Premier common stock for each share of Opus they own.

On April 6, 2020, Defendants filed a Form S-4 Registration Statement with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the Proposed Transaction, which scheduled a stockholder vote on the Proposed Transaction for May 5, 2020. The Complaint alleges that the Registration Statement omits material information with respect to the Proposed Transaction, which renders the Registration Statement false and misleading.


Sector: Financial
Industry: Regional Banks
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: OPB
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 #: 20-CV-00536
JUDGE: Hon. Colm F. Connolly
DATE FILED: 04/21/2020
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/21/2020
  1. Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. (Wilmington)
  2. RM Law, P.C. (Berwyn)
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available