Acuity investors may receive additional information about the case by clicking the link "Submit Your Information" above.
According to the complaint, Acuity is a provider of lighting and building management solutions for commercial, institutional, industrial, infrastructure, and residential applications.
The complaint alleges that on October 5, 2016, Acuity released the first in a series of disappointing quarterly financial and operational reports to investors. During a conference call to discuss the company’s fourth quarter and full-year fiscal 2016 financial results, defendant Vernon J. Nagel explained that “[t]his year’s presidential election in the US and events such as UK’s referendum vote to exit the European Union continue to create uncertainty and volatility.” Following this news, shares of Acuity’s stock declined $12.01 per share, or over 4.7 percent, to close on October 5, 2016, at $242.99 per share, on unusually heavy trading volume.
Then, on January 9, 2017, Acuity issued a press release to report financial and operational results for the first quarter fiscal 2017. During a conference call to discuss those results, defendant Nagel represented that “[d]emand softened in the back half of the quarter particularly for smaller projects apparently due to, what many of our customers are telling us, election jitters,” and that profitability suffered from carrying excess employees during the quarter “with the anticipation of higher volumes” of sales than that actually generated. Following this news, shares of Acuity’s stock declined $34.85 per share, or nearly 14.7 percent, to close on January 9, 2017, at $202.51 per share.
Finally, on April 4, 2017, Acuity issued a press release to report financial and operational results for the second quarter fiscal 2017. During a conference call to discuss those results, defendant Nagel continued to blame “the impact of continued softness in demand for certain short cycle, small lighting projects,” but acknowledged for the first time that demand softness “could potentially linger into the second half of 2017.” Following this news, shares of Acuity’s stock fell an additional $30.13 per share, or over 14.7 percent, to close on April 4, 2017, at $173.93 per share, on unusually heavy trading volume.
The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the defendants: (i) concealed known trends negatively impacting sales of the company’s products; and (ii) overstated the company’s ability to achieve profitable sales growth. As a result of the foregoing, the defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about Acuity’s current and future business and financial prospects.
If you are a member of the class described above, you may no later than March 5, 2018 move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class, if you so choose.
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. 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 purported class may move the court to serve as a lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an inactive class member.
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP has not filed a complaint in this matter. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP toll free at 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706, or via e-mail at email@example.com.
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
James Maro, Esq. or Adrienne Bell, Esq.
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706
Or by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org