Robbins
Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (“Robbins Geller”) (http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/oceanpower/)
today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United
States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of
purchasers of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (“Ocean Power”)
(NASDAQ:OPTT) common stock during the period between January 14, 2014
and July 14, 2014 (the “Class Period”), including purchasers in Ocean
Power’s April 3, 2014 follow-on public stock offering (“Follow-on
Offering”) at $3.10 per share.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later
than 60 days from June 13, 2014. If you wish to discuss this action or
have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests,
please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Samuel
H. Rudman or David
A. Rosenfeld of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or
via e-mail at djr@rgrdlaw.com. If
you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as
filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/oceanpower/.
Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead
plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing
and remain an absent class member.
The complaint charges Ocean Power and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Ocean
Power develops and is seeking to commercialize proprietary systems that
generate electricity by harnessing the renewable energy of ocean waves.
On April 3, 2014, the Company sold 4.37 million shares of Ocean Power
common stock to the public at $3.10 per share, raising more than $13.5
million in gross proceeds. The complaint alleges that in carrying out
the Follow-on Offering, and throughout the Class Period, defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company’s business results and financial prospects in press releases,
analyst conference calls and filings with the SEC in order to buttress
the market price of its stock. As a result of defendants’ false
statements, the price of Ocean Power stock traded at artificially
inflated prices throughout the Class Period, reaching a Class Period
high of $7.01 per share in intraday trading on March 11, 2014.
On June 10, 2014, Ocean Power suddenly announced that it had terminated
its Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), defendant Charles F. Dunleavy, “for
cause.” The Company also announced that the Company’s Board of Directors
had appointed a Special Committee, composed of outside directors and the
Interim CEO, to conduct an internal investigation into the agreement
between Victorian Wave Partners Pty Ltd (“VWP”), a project-specific
operating entity wholly owned by the Company’s subsidiary Ocean Power
Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd, and the Australian Renewable Energy
Agency, and related public statements concerning that project. On this
news, shares of Ocean Power declined over 34% to close on June 10, 2014
at $1.63 per share.
Thereafter, on July 14, 2014, after the close of trading, the Company
disclosed that Ocean Power was canceling the plans to build the
renewable-energy project off the Australian coast altogether, with the
Company’s VWP unit halting plans to deploy its PowerBuoys off the coast
of Victoria, conceding now that the A$232 million (US$217 million)
project was not “commercially viable.” Ocean Power also stated that it
would return the A$5.6 million it received as part of a A$66.5 million
grant from the Australian government to support the project. On this
news, the price of Ocean Power common stock fell another 23% to close at
$1.18 per share on July 15, 2014, its lowest price since Ocean Power’s
U.S. initial public offering in 2007.
According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the
defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class
Period, were as follows: (a) the Company may have misstated the nature
and/or circumstances of its agreement with the Australian Renewable
Energy Agency to build a renewable energy project off the Australian
coast; (b) the renewable energy project off the Australian coast was not
commercially viable; and (c) as a result of the foregoing, defendants’
statements concerning the renewable energy project off the Australian
coast and positive statements about Ocean Power’s business, operations
and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a
reasonable basis.
Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Ocean
Power common stock during the Class Period (the “Class”). The plaintiff
is represented by Robbins Geller, which has expertise in prosecuting
investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving
financial fraud.
Robbins Geller, with more than 200 lawyers in ten offices, represents
U.S. and international institutional investors in contingency-based
securities and corporate litigation. The firm has obtained many of the
largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the
largest jury verdict ever in a securities class action. Please visit http://www.rgrdlaw.com
for more information.
Copyright Business Wire 2014