WILMINGTON, Del.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.:
- Do you, or did you, own shares of Orthofix International N.V. (NASDAQ GS: OFIX)?
- Did you purchase your shares between May 5, 2011 and July 29, 2013, inclusive?
- Did you lose money in your investment in Orthofix International N.V.?
- 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 Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of Orthofix International N.V. (“Orthofix” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ GS: OFIX) between May 5, 2011 and July 29, 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 Orthofix during the Class Period 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/orthofix-international-n-v-ofix.
Orthofix is a diversified, global medical device company focused on developing and delivering innovative repair and regenerative solutions to the spine and orthopedic 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 concealed from the investing public that: (a) certain revenues recognized during 2011 and 2012 should not have been recognized or should not have been recognized during periods in which they were recognized; (b) the Company’s previously issued consolidated financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2012 (as well as the interim quarterly periods within such years), as well as for the interim quarterly period ended March 31, 2013, should not be relied upon; (c) the Company’s financial statements during 2011, 2012, and the first quarter of 2013 were materially false and misleading by violating Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Orthofix’s publicly disclosed policy of revenue recognition; (d) the Company’s Forms 10-Q and 10-K for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 (as well as interim quarterly periods within such years), as well as for the first quarter of 2013 failed to disclose then previously known trends, events or uncertainties associated with the Company’s revenues that were reasonably likely to have a material effect on Orthofix’s future operating results; (e) the Company’s disclosure controls and its disclosure controls and procedures over financial reporting were materially deficient and its representations concerning them during the Class Period, including certifications issued by Defendants, were materially false and misleading; and (f) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company’s financial performance and outlook during the Class Period. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading statements, the Company’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. During this time, Company insiders utilized these inflated prices to sell over $4.8 million worth of their Company shares.
According to the Complaint, on July 29, 2013, the Company issued a press release announcing that it was delaying the release of its financial results for the second quarter of 2013. In the release, the Company stated that the Audit Committee of its Board of Directors, on the recommendation of management, and after discussion with the Company’s independent auditors, concluded that additional time was needed to review matters relating to revenue recognition for prior periods. Further, the Audit Committee had commenced an independent review into these matters, with the assistance of outside professionals. On this news, shares in Orthofix dropped more than 16%, closing at $22.94 per share on July 30, 2013, on heavy trading volume of over 1.3 million shares.
On August 6, 2013, Orthofix issued a press release stating that the Company will restate its financial statements for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 and the first quarter of 2013. In the release, the Company stated that the Audit Committee concluded, after consultation with management and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, that certain revenues recognized during 2011 and 2012, upon further evaluation, should not have been recognized or should not have been recognized during the periods in which they were recognized.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October 14, 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.