N🟁N

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Action Suit against Imperial Sugar Company

  //house-home.news-articles.net/content/2011/09/0 .. -action-suit-against-imperial-sugar-company.html
  Published in House and Home on Thursday, September 1st 2011 at 20:21 GMT by Market Wire
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication}

NEW YORK--([ BUSINESS WIRE ])--Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (aRobbins Gellera) ([ http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/imperialsugar/ ]) today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on behalf of purchasers of Imperial Sugar Company (aISCa) (NASDAQ:IPSU) common stock during the period between December 29, 2010 and August 5, 2011 (the aClass Perioda).

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiffa™s counsel, Samuel H. Rudman or David A. Rosenfeld of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at [ djr@rgrdlaw.com ]. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at [ http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/imperialsugar/ ]. 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.

The complaint charges ISC and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company refines, packages and distributes cane sugar at refineries located in the states of Georgia and Louisiana. ISC also markets sugar and other sweeteners in Mexico and Canada through its joint venture operations.

The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Companya™s business and prospects. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (a) that the Company was experiencing a known but undisclosed reduction in customer demand for its products resulting from Mexican and other sugar refiners selling sugar products into ISCa™s markets at steeply discounted prices; (b) that the decline in the Companya™s sales volumes during the Class Period was primarily due to a lack of customer demand ensuing from forays by competitors selling lower-priced products into ISCa™s markets and not due to Company refinery production supply constraints; (c) that, as a result of the foregoing, ISC was experiencing a significant decline in its gross margins, particularly in the second half of the Class Period; (d) that the Companya™s Port Wentworth, Georgia refinery was experiencing ongoing operating defects that resulted in higher production costs and adversely impacted ISCa™s gross margins; (e) that defendantsa™ representations about the Companya™s disclosure controls were materially false and misleading; and (f) that, based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its business prospects during the Class Period.

On August 5, 2011, ISC announced its operating results for the quarter ended June 30, 2011. That same day, ISC filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, which revealed that the Companya™s industrial sales volumes had declined by more than 40% from the same prior year period.

Following the Companya™s 2011 fiscal third quarter earnings announcement, defendants held a conference call with securities analysts for investors wherein it was revealed that: (i) the Companya™s 2011 industrial orders, and hence, its industrial sales volumes, were booked and therefore known to defendants well in advance of 2011; (ii) ISC had filled all of its existing orders during the June 2011 quarter, including its industrial orders; (iii) production at the Companya™s refineries did not limit its sales volumes; (iv) ISCa™s Port Wentworth, Georgia refinery had experienced ongoing operating defects, resulting in higher production costs that adversely impacted the Companya™s gross margins; and (v) competitive pricing by low cost Mexican and other sugar refiners had a material adverse effect on the Companya™s sales and gross margins.

In response to these revelations, shares of the Companya™s common stock plummeted nearly 60%, from $23.19 per share on August 4, 2011 to $9.44 on August 5, 2011.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of ISC common stock during the Class Period (the aClassa). Plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud.

Robbins Geller, a 180-lawyer firm with offices in San Diego, San Francisco, New York, Boca Raton, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia and Atlanta, is active in major litigations pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States and has taken a leading role in many important actions on behalf of defrauded investors, consumers, and companies, as well as victims of human rights violations. The Robbins Geller Web site ([ http://www.rgrdlaw.com ]) has more information about the firm.