CHICAGO, April 19, 2002 (PRIMEZONE) -- Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C. announces that class action lawsuits are pending in various federal courts on behalf of purchasers of the following securities during the periods set forth below:
Company Class Period L90, Inc. July 26, 2001 - March 12, 2002 (Nasdaq:LNTYE) (formerly LNTY) Saf T Lok, Inc. (OTCBB:LOCK) April 14, 2000 - April 16, 2001 Stillwater Mining Company (NYSE:SWC) April 20, 2001 - April 1, 2002 ViroPharma (Nasdaq:VPHM) July 13, 1999 - March 19, 2002
Much Shelist is currently investigating potential claims against these companies. If you purchased securities in any of these companies during the periods listed and wish to discuss your rights and interests in any of these matters, or if you have information relevant to any of the lawsuits, you may contact Carol V. Gilden or Michael E. Moskovitz at Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C., by calling a toll-free number 1-800-470-6824, or by sending an e-mail to investorhelp@muchlaw.com. Your e-mail should refer to the company or companies that affect you. A description of the investigations follows:
L90, Inc. (Nasdaq:LNTYE) (formerly LNTY)
Lead Plaintiff Petitions Due May 20, 2002
Much Shelist is investigating whether L90, Inc. ("L90") and certain of its officers violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by concealing L90's improper acts until they were able to conceal their fraud by selling the Company to a third party prior to filing the Company's 10-K (due March 31, 2002). In order to overstate revenues and assets in its second and third quarters of 2001, L90 violated Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Securities and Exchange Commission rules by engaging in improper "roundtrip" transactions with HomeStore.com and its customers. These transactions had the effect of dramatically overstating revenues and assets.
On February 4, 2002, L90 issued a press release entitled, "L90 Reports Regulatory Inquiries." The press release stated in part: "L90, Inc., an online media and direct marketing company, today announced that the Company has received notice from the Securities and Exchange Commission that the Commission is conducting an investigation into the Company. In connection with this investigation, the Commission has issued the Company and one of its directors subpoenas requesting documents related primarily to the Company's financial records." On this news the Company's shares plummeted by more than 50% the following trading day and continued to drop further in the weeks that followed as defendants revealed further incriminating facts.
On March 12, 2002, L90 issued a press release entitled, "L90 Provides Additional Information on Internal Investigation." The press release stated in part: "L90, Inc., an online media and direct marketing company, today provided additional information on the status of the ongoing internal investigation by the Company and the Audit Committee of its board of directors in response to the previously announced Securities and Exchange Commission investigation of the Company, and the request for information from Nasdaq Listing Investigations."
Saf T Lok, Inc. (OTCBB:LOCK)
Lead Plaintiff Petitions Due May 31, 2002
Much Shelist is investigating whether Saf T Lok, Inc. ("Saf T Lok") and certain of its officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market between April 14, 2000 and April 16, 2001. Specifically, Much Shelist believes that Saf T Lok filed materially false and misleading financial statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which, among other things, did not comply with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. In April 2000 Saf T Lok disclosed that it had terminated its exclusive consumer market distribution agreement with United Safety Action, Inc. ("USA") and that Saf T Lok would now be permitted to market its products to retail customers. Much Shelist further believes that the financial statements filed by Saf T Lok failed to disclose, among other things, that:
(1) a catalog retailer had previously obtained Saf T Lok products
from USA at a sharply reduced price and was now selling these
products at extremely low prices, thereby limiting the market
opportunity for Saf T Lok;
(2) Saf T Lok's earnings, assets and shareholder equity were
overstated by at least $3.2 million; and
(3) Saf T Lok's inventories were not stated at the lower of cost or
market, as represented.
When this information was finally disclosed on April 16, 2001, Saf T Lok's stock price fell to under $0.30 per share. Subsequently, on May 15, 2001, Saf T Lok's securities were delisted from the Nasdaq Small Cap Market and are currently traded on the OTC (Over The Counter) Bulletin Board.
Stillwater Mining Company (NYSE:SWC)
Lead Plaintiff Petitions Due June 10, 2002
Much Shelist is investigating whether Stillwater Mining Company ("Stillwater") and certain of its officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market between April 20, 2001 and April 1, 2002. Much Shelist believes that Stillwater issued a series of materially false and misleading statements regarding its financial performance and filed reports confirming such performance with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). Specifically, Much Shelist believes that Stillwater's statements were materially false and misleading because, among other things:
(a) Stillwater improperly classified "mineralized material" as
"probable reserves";
(b) Stillwater's improper manipulation of probable reserves
overstated Stillwater's class period net income because
Stillwater depreciated its plant and equipment costs according to
the life of these reserves. If Stillwater had properly accounted
for these reserves, depreciation would have occurred much faster;
and
(c) the reduction in probable reserves will likely result in an
impairment charge, or a restatement of at least fiscal year 2001
results. Furthermore, Stillwater failed to disclose that the SEC
had advised Stillwater by mid-December 2001/early January 2002
that its methodology for the calculation of probable ore reserves
was improper and would have to be changed.
On April 2, 2002, when Stillwater belatedly disclosed that its accounting practices had been condemned by the SEC, the stock dropped by 24% in one day on extraordinarily high volumes of 4,743,600 shares traded, much larger than its average trading volume of approximately 400,000 shares per day. The full extent of Stillwater's losses is still unknown to the market, since the revision to reserves could adversely impact 2001 net income and result in a downward financial restatement of prior quarters.
ViroPharma, Inc. (Nasdaq:VPHM)
Lead Plaintiff Petitions Due May 28, 2002
Much Shelist is investigating whether ViroPharma, Inc. ("ViroPharma" or the "Company") and certain of its officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by issuing materially false and misleading statements. Specifically, Much Shelist believes that ViroPharma made highly positive statements regarding its drug Picovir. ViroPharma represented that its growth was contingent on U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") approval of Picovir (pleconaril) as a cure for the common cold. ViroPharma informed the investing public of every positive part of the Picovir studies. The Company sent numerous press releases praising the effectiveness of Picovir. The Company, however, minimized or concealed potential obstacles to FDA approval.
On March 19, 2002 trading was halted as the Company revealed that an FDA advisory committee was deciding the fate of ViroPharma's cold treatment, Picovir. The panel voted 15-0 against approval because of safety concerns despite the Company's prior insistence that treatment was well tolerated and that adverse events were comparable to placebo in the trials. On March 20, 2002 after the resumption of trading, shares of ViroPharma plummeted 60 percent. The 15-member FDA committee had questions about the safety of the drug in women taking oral contraceptives and in the elderly. In addition, the committee asked for broader studies on the drug's benefits with minorities, the elderly, patients with asthma and chronic bronchitis, children, and more about the drug's interaction with other medications. They also expressed concern that the drug may develop drug-resistant cold germs.
ViroPharma faced tremendous obstacles before it could receive regulatory approval for Picovir. ViroPharma did not disclose these obstacles even though they were well known to ViroPharma by virtue of their testing and trials of this drug on thousands of people for several years.
Much Shelist seeks to recover damages on behalf of class members in these companies. If you purchased securities in any of these companies during the Class Periods referenced above and if you meet certain other legal requirements, you may move the court where the lawsuit(s) has been filed within the time period described above to serve as a lead plaintiff. Please contact Carol V. Gilden or Michael E. Moskovitz at Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C., by calling a toll-free number 1-800-470-6824, or by sending an e-mail to investorhelp@muchlaw.com. Your e-mail should refer to the company or companies that affect you.
A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts 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. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. The requirements for serving as a lead plaintiff are set forth in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Section 78u-4).
Much Shelist's history is one of experience, leadership and results. For more than 25 years, Much Shelist has represented plaintiffs in class action litigation in federal and state courts across the United States. The firm has successfully prosecuted cases involving securities fraud, antitrust violations, consumer fraud, unlawful business practices and insurance company fraud. Under Much Shelist's leadership, class members have obtained judgments and settlements in excess of $4 billion.
More information on this and other class actions can be found on the Class Action Newsline at www.primezone.com/ca.