Bernstein Liebhard LLP Announces Filing of a Class Action Against Wonder Auto Technology, Inc.
June 02, 2011
Bernstein Liebhard LLP today announced that a lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a class (the “Class”) of investors who purchased Wonder Auto Technology, Inc. (“Wonder Auto” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: WATG) common stock between the period of May 14, 2008 and May 6, 2011 (the “Class Period”).
The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, (1) the Company improperly recognized revenue in incorrect financial reporting periods as its subsidiaries improperly recorded its sales and costs of sales; (2) the Company improperly engaged in several transactions without properly disclosing their related-party nature; (3) the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On March 1, 2011, the Company disclosed that its previously issued financial statements for fiscal years 2008 and 2009, as well as its interim reports for those periods “should no longer be relied upon due to a cutoff error regarding timing of revenue in such periods.” On March 25, 2011, the Company disclosed that it had “received a notification letter from the NASDAQ Stock Market indicating that the Company was not in compliance” with NASDAQ’s continued listing requirements as it failed to timely file its annual report on a Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010. On May 6, 2011, after the close of trading, NASDAQ halted the trading of Wonder Auto stock until the Company satisfied NASDAQ’s request for “additional information.” Trading has not been resumed.
On May 12, 2011, the Company disclosed in a press release that its Audit Committee had “undertaken an internal investigation concerning certain investment and acquisition transactions.” On May 20, 2011, the Company disclosed that the Audit Committee’s investigation will continue until at least June 2011 and was commenced “in response to a report alleging that the Company had engaged in several transactions without properly disclosing their related-party nature.”
Plaintiffs seek to recover damages on behalf of all Class members who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of Wonder Auto during the Class Period. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Wonder Auto shares during the Class Period, and either lost money on the transaction or still hold the shares, you may wish to join in this action to serve as lead plaintiff. In order to do so, you must meet certain requirements set forth in the applicable law and file appropriate papers no later than August 1, 2011.
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. You may retain Bernstein Liebhard LLP, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.
If you are interested in discussing your rights as a Wonder Auto shareholder and/or have information relating to the matter, please contact Joseph R. Seidman, Jr. at (877) 779-1414 or email@example.com. You can obtain a copy of the complaint from the clerk of the court for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Bernstein Liebhard has pursued hundreds of securities, consumer and shareholder rights cases and recovered almost $3 billion for its clients. It has been named to The National Law Journal’s “Plaintiffs’ Hot List” in each of the last eight years.