WILMINGTON, Del.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.:
- Do you, or did you, own shares of Inteliquent, Inc. (NASDAQ GS: IQNT)?
- Did you purchase your shares before May 7, 2012, or between May 7, 2012 and August 7, 2013, inclusive?
- Did you lose money in your investment in Inteliquent, Inc.?
- Do you want to discuss your rights?
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., including former Special Assistant United States Attorney, Timothy J. MacFall, announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of Inteliquent, Inc. (“Inteliquent” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ GS: IQNT) between May 7, 2012 and August 7, 2013, inclusive (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 Inteliquent during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold Inteliquent, 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/inteliquent-inc-iqnt.
Inteliquent provides voice, IP Transit, and Ethernet telecommunications services primarily on a wholesale basis. 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 concealed from the investing public that: (1) the Company misstated the impairment of goodwill, intangibles and long-lived assets; (2) the Company had improper financial forecasting practices; (3) the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. 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, throughout the Class Period, the Company lacked adequate internal controls over its financial reporting, and provided false and misleading forecasts of its financial results. In addition, the Company materially misstated an impairment charge of $78.1 million for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. In a blatant example of the Company’s misleading forecasting, on July 15, 2013, less than four weeks before the Company announced the need for an investigation into its financial forecasting practices, the Company predicted net income of $22.2 million and adjusted Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (“EBITDA”) of $59.5 million for fiscal year 2013. On this news, the Company’s stock skyrocketed 39%, to close at $8.50 per share on July 15, 2013.
However, in an August 8, 2013 press release, it was disclosed that during the second quarter of 2013, the Board of Directors of the Company determined that the Audit Committee would conduct an “internal investigation of whether [an] impairment charge was overstated” in addition to the Company’s “forecasting practices during the fourth quarter of 2012 and the first quarter of 2013.” On this news, shares in Inteliquent dropped more than 21%, closing at $6.29 per share on August 8, 2013, on heavy trading volume of over 2.7 million shares.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October 8, 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.