BP p.l.c investors may receive additional information about the case by clicking the link "Join this Class Action" above.
According to the complaint BP operates as an integrated oil and gas company worldwide.
The case, which was filed in 2008, charges BP plc, and certain of its officers and directors, with violations of federal securities laws. The complaint alleges that defendants intentionally, and/or with deliberate recklessness, failed to disclose the foreseeable risk that oil production at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska would have to be shutdown, or dramatically curtailed, because the pipelines were severely corroded as a result of BP’s substandard maintenance and monitoring practices.
On March 2, 2006, BP discovered that a leak in a pipeline in the Western Operating Area of Prudhoe Bay (“WOA”) had caused a massive spill of more than 200,000gallons of oil. The spill covered more than 2 acres of tundra and was by far the largest ecological disaster caused by a failed pipeline in the history of oil exploration in Alaska. The magnitude of the damage to the environment caused public furor. Congress launched an investigation. The Department of Transportation intervened immediately into the operation, maintenance, and inspection of BP’s pipelines in Prudhoe Bay. And the State of Alaska’s environmental agency ordered that BP conduct an investigation of the cause of the spill.
By the time the market opened on Monday August 7, 2006, BP had announced the shutdown of oil production at Prudhoe Bay due to the discovery of additional corrosion in more pipelines and an additional oil spill. As a result of this announcement, (i) BP’s ordinary shares fell 13.5 pence (from a closing price of 636 pence on August 4 to a closing price of 622.5 pence on August 7), or 2.1 percent on extraordinarily heavy volume of 94.5 million shares, and (ii) BP’s ADRs dropped $2.09 (from a closing price of $72.54 on August 4 to a closing price of $70.45 on August 7), or 2.8 percent, on volume of 6.1 million shares.
On April 3, 2015, Judge Pechman decided that she would open up the lead plaintiff process again in a “modified format” and invited “outside applicants to move for appointment” in the case, no later than July 3, 2015.
If you are a member of the class described above, you may no later than June 2, 2015, 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.
Contact
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
James Maro, Esq.
Adrienne Bell, Esq.
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706