WILMINGTON, Del.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of Neptune Technologies & Bioresources Inc. (“Neptune” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ CM: NEPT) between December 12, 2011 and November 8, 2012 (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers (the “Complaint”).
If you purchased shares of Neptune during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold Neptune, and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, NY at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to email@example.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/neptune-technologies-bioresources-inc-nept.
Neptune is a Quebec, Canada-based biotechnology company that develops and commercializes krill oil products extracted from Antarctica krill for the nutraceutical, pharmaceutical, cosmetic, and pet food markets. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and omitted materially adverse facts, about the Company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Defendants misled investors about the Company’s future prospects by, among other things, failing to disclose that it had adopted an aggressive policy of volume discount to secure market share; and failing to disclose that the Company had not obtained necessary permits for the massive expansion project undertaken at the Company’s production plant in Sherbrooke – the Company’s sole production facility which housed all of its inventory. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading statements, the Company’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.
According to the Complaint, in speaking of the benefits of the Sherbrooke production plant expansion, the Company boasted of exponentially expanded production facilities, new state of the art production technologies, and increased profit margins, revenues and earnings. On the strength of the inflated stock price generated from these statements, the Company undertook a $34+ million registered public stock offering, raising capital that would be used to fund the expansion of the Sherbrooke facility.
Defendants, however, installed equipment facilitating the storage of dangerously high levels of acetone at the Sherbrooke facility which, in turn, led to its destruction following an explosion and fire on November 8, 2012, that destroyed the Sherbrooke production facility, and damaged the expansion facility. As a result, the Company’s entire manufacturing capabilities have been indefinitely halted. The trading of Neptune stock was halted following this explosion and upon its resumption on November 27, 2012, it proceeded to close down almost 32% from its closing price prior on the day prior to the explosion. The future of the Neptune’s business now hangs in limbo as the Company is unable to produce their own krill oil. Further, the Company may be subject to millions of dollars in civil and criminal liability stemming from the explosion and fire.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than February 18, 2013. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
While Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. did not file the Complaint in this matter, the firm, with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.