N@N

Hagens Berman Reminds Investors of Lead Plaintiff Deadline in Class-Action Lawsuit against HQ Sustainable Maritime Industries,

^{Published on 2011-05-07 11:55:41 - Market Wire}
 

SEATTLE--([ BUSINESS WIRE ])--Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (aHagens Bermana) ([ http://www.hbsslaw.com ]) today reminded investors of a June 26, 2011 lead plaintiff deadline in a class action against HQ Sustainable Maritime Industries, Inc. (aHQSa or the aCompanya) (AMEX:HQS).

"an integrated aquaculture and aquatic product processing company, with operations based in the environmentally pristine island province of Hainan, in China's South Sea."

The case, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of HQS between May 11, 2009 and April 1, 2011, inclusive (the aClass Perioda), seeks to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the aExchange Acta).

Any member of the putative 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. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court by June 26, 2011.

If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiffa™s counsel, Karl Barth of Hagens Berman at 206-623-7292, or via e-mail at [ HQS@hbsslaw.com ]. You can also join the case online at [ www.hbsslaw.com/HQSM ].

The complaint charges HQS and certain of its officers and executives with violations of the Exchange Act. HQS describes itself as aan integrated aquaculture and aquatic product processing company, with operations based in the environmentally pristine island province of Hainan, in China's South Sea.a

The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Companya™s true financial condition, business and prospects. Specifically, the complaint alleges: (i) that a substantial portion of the Companya™s revenues were overstated; (ii) that HQSa™ financial statements were not fairly presented in conformity with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and were materially false and misleading; (iii) that HQS was operating with material deficiencies in its system of internal control over its financial reporting; and (iv) that, based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company, its prospects and growth.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that:

• On March 16, 2011, the Company announced in a press release that it would file a Notification of Late Filing on Form 12b-25 with the SEC, allowing it to postpone the filing of its annual report on Form 10-K for fifteen calendar days, or until April 1, 2011. The Company disclosed that it afully expecteda to file the Form 10-K by the April 1, 2011 deadline;
• After the close of the market on April 1, 2011, investors were shocked to discover that HQSM was still out of compliance with federal laws and AMEX listing standards, causing trading in the Companya™s shares to be suspended by the AMEX. HQSM shares closed trading on April 1, 2011 at $2.78 per share. The Companya™s shares were then suspended from further trading, and have not resumed trading since;
• In a letter dated April 6, 2011 (which was filed as an Exhibit to the Companya™s Form 8-K filed on April 11, 2011), the Chairman of HQSMa™s audit committee of the board of directors, Andrew Intrader, abruptly resigned, and disclosed some of the previously undisclosed problems that were going on behind the scenes at HQSM. Director Intrader noted how the CEO of the Company had blocked the Companya™s independent auditors from reviewing data necessary to audit the reported sales and revenues of HQSM. As a result, Director Intrader felt acompelled by consciencea to resign his position as audit committee chairman and as a director of the Company; and
• To this date, the Company has still not filed its financial reports, is still out of compliance with federal law and AMEX regulations, and has never resumed trading.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of HQS during the Class Period (the aClassa). The plaintiff is represented by Hagens Berman, which has extensive expertise in prosecuting securities fraud class actions.

[ About Hagens Berman ]

Seattle-based Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP is one of the top class-action law firms in the nation, with offices in Boston, Chicago, Colorado Springs, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New York, Phoenix, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. Founded in 1993, we represent plaintiffs in class actions and multi-state, large-scale litigation that seek to protect the rights of investors, consumers, workers and [ whistleblowers ]. More information about the firm is available at [ www.hbsslaw.com ].