Marijuana Producer Faces Shareholder Lawsuit After Sales Plummet
The investor lawsuit said Aurora Cannabis never gave any hint in public statements that it expected a substantial decrease in sales, nor indicated it planned to pause construction at two sites.
November 22, 2019 at 04:53 PM
3 minute read
Marijuana producer Aurora Cannabis was hit with a shareholder class action lawsuit in New Jersey federal court Thursday after analysts were caught off guard by plummeting sales.
The Canadian company, which began trading on the New York Stock Exchange in October 2018, has operations in 24 countries. Aurora and Coca-Cola announced in September that they were studying the market for cannabis-infused beverages. But on Nov. 14 Aurora said its sales had fallen 25% and marijuana sales to consumers fell 33% in the three months ending on Sept. 30.
The company also said it was halting spending on construction of production facilities in Alberta, Canada, and Odense, Denmark. That came six weeks after the company made optimistic statements about the completion of those facilities.
The investor lawsuit, filed by Laurence Rosen of the Rosen Law Firm, says Aurora never gave any hint in public statements of a substantial decrease in sales before the Nov. 14 announcement.
The lawsuit also claims the company made "materially false and misleading statements" during that period under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The suit seeks to recover damages on behalf of parties who acquired Aurora stock between Sept. 11 and Nov. 14.
The lawsuit also names CEO Terry Booth, President Stephen Dobler, CFO Glen Ibbott, COO Cam Battley and Executive Chairman Michael Singer as defendants. Each of the individual defendants "was aware of or recklessly disregarded the fact that the false and misleading statements were being issued concerning the company," the suit said.
Aurora said in a 40-F report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Sept. 11 that revenue from cannabis sales to consumers had grown 52% between the third and fourth quarters of 2019, according to the lawsuit. And on Oct. 3, the company issued a press release saying its production facilities in Canada and Denmark were nearing completion.
But those statements were "materially false and misleading" because they misrepresented facts known to the defendants or recklessly disregarded them, the suit said. The complaint cited Aurora's failure to disclose that revenue would decline in the quarter ending Sept. 30, and failed to say it would halt construction at its two new facilities. As a result the defendants' statements about their business, operations and prospects were "materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis," the suit claims.
Aurora and Rosen also did not respond to a request for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Judge Approves $667K Settlement Against Independence Blue Cross for Unpaid, Pre-Shift Computer Work
4 minute read
Essex County Jury Returns $1.8 Million Verdict for Construction Site Fall
3 minute read
Lowenstein Hires Ex-FTX US General Counsel Ryne Miller to Lead Its Commodities, Derivatives Practice
3 minute read
Drugmaker Wins $70.5M After Fed Judge Says Generic Sales Were Blocked
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
