Skip to content

UniTek Global Services securities class action settlement pending

Shareholders of an engineering construction management firm will have a date to learn more about the settlement of a securities class action lawsuit.

Law office Robbins, Geller, Rudman and Dowd, LLP, noted that the class action settlement involving UniTek Global Services, Inc., will be discussed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This involves all shareholders who purchased interests in the company during the class period between May 18, 2011, and April 12, 2013.

The hearing will occur on June 13, 2014, and will determine if the settlement amount of $1.55 million is fair and correct for all parties. The judge will also make rulings on whether the lawsuit should be dismissed against the company, the level of allocation to all parties and how much the lead counsel's and other attorneys' fees should be handed out.

It is important for shareholders who are a part of the class period to take action and fill out the proper paperwork needed to either be a part of the settlement, or protest against it. Speaking with the claims administrator will be best for those looking for documents such as the proposed settlement of class action, notice of pendency, motion for attorneys' fees and final approval hearing notice.

Those who want to take part on the settlement need to send in the proof of claim form with a postmark of July 11, 2014, at the latest. Any shareholders who fail to do this will still be a part of the class, but not able to collect their funds. Those who have objections to the settlement need to send in their issues to the court and have them arrive by May 23, 2014.

For any shareholders who have questions about this process, the law firm is available to discuss these matters. It is possible to write a letter to the law firm regarding any issues about the process.

Initial lawsuit details
Law firm Berman DeValerio originally filed a lawsuit against the company on behalf of shareholders in May 2013. This was due to potential violations of securities laws alleged against the company by shareholders.

Specifically, the allegations were that the company violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. This was in response to a company statement that the company had employees that participated in activities that may have been fraudulent and affected how revenue was recognized.

Scroll To Top