WILMINGTON, Del.--(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 securities of Central European Distribution Corporation (“CEDC” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ GS: CEDC) between March 1, 2010 and June 4, 2012, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers and directors (the “Complaint”).)--
If you purchased shares of CEDC during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold CEDC stock, 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 firstname.lastname@example.org, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/central-european-distribution-corporation-cedc.
CEDC, a Delaware corporation headquartered in Mount Laurel, New Jersey, operates primarily in the alcohol beverage industry. The Company is one of the largest producers of vodka in the world and is Central and Eastern Europe’s largest integrated spirit beverage business. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business operations, financial condition and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that: (1) the Company’s reported net sales in the years ended December 31, 2010 and December 31. 2011 were materially inflated; and (2) as a result of its failure to appropriately account for customer rebates, the Company anticipates restating its reported consolidated net sales, operating profit and related accounts receivable for these periods by approximately $30 to $40 million. 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, on June 4, 2012, the Company issued a press release disclosing that it expected to restate its financial results for all reporting periods from and after January 1, 2010. Following the change in its senior management at its main operating subsidiary in Russia, the Russian Alcohol Group (“RAG”), during April 2012, senior CEDC management requested that the new management team review RAG’s business operations and internal controls, including an assessment of the resources and needs of the corporate finance and reporting departments, as identified in Item 9A of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011. As a result of the preliminary findings of that review, senior CEDC management determined that CEDC’s reported net sales in the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2011 failed to reflect the timely reporting of the full amount of retroactive trade rebates provided to RAG’s customers in Russia.
In addition, the Company announced that it is reviewing whether any adjustments would also need to be made to the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009. In the release, CEDC estimated that the aggregate effect of the adjustments identified to date would result in a reduction of its consolidated net sales, operating profit and related accounts receivable from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011 of approximately $30 to $40 million. On this news, shares of CEDC common stock dropped over 10%, closing at $3.17 per share on June 5, 2012 from $3.55 the previous day, on unusually heavy trading volume of over 3 million shares.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than August 7, 2012. 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.