Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP reminds investors of the January 22, 2013 deadline to move for appointment as lead plaintiff in the securities class litigation brought on behalf of purchasers of the common units of Hi-Crush Partners LP (“Hi-Crush” or the “Company”) (NYSE: HCLP) pursuant and/or traceable to the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with its initial public offering on or about August 16, 2012 (the “IPO”).
If you purchased or otherwise acquired Hi-Crush common units pursuant and or traceable to the Registration Statement and Prospectus, you may move the Court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than January 22, 2013. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Your share of any recovery in the action will not be affected by your decision of whether to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. You may retain Lieff Cabraser, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.
The actions allege that the Registration Statement issued in connection with Hi-Crush’s IPO was materially false and misleading. The Registration Statement and Prospectus touted certain lucrative long-term contracts with large customers, including Baker Hughes Incorporated (“Baker Hughes”).
On November 13, 2012, the Company issued a press release announcing that Baker Hughes had unilaterally repudiated the supply contract with Hi-Crush on September 19, 2012 and claimed that Hi-Crush had breached the contract. Following this disclosure, the price of Hi-Crush common units fell $5.35 per unit to close at $15.00, significantly below the IPO price of $17 per common unit.
The actions allege that the Registration Statement and Prospectus failed to disclose the following material adverse facts: (a) in February 2012, after executing the original supply contract with Hi-Crush, Baker Hughes began expressing an unwillingness to comply with that contract; (b) six months prior to the IPO, Baker Hughes had demanded significant volume and other concessions resulting in the execution of an amended supply contract; (c) according to Baker Hughes, Hi-Crush had, or was, violating confidentiality provisions in the supply contract; and (d) as a result, Baker Hughes would repudiate all of its financial obligations under the supply contract, materially decreasing Hi-Crush’s revenues and profits.
Lieff Cabraser is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.
Since 2003, the National Law Journal has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the top plaintiffs’ law firms in the nation. Lieff Cabraser is one of only two plaintiffs’ law firms in the United States to receive this honor for the last ten consecutive years.
For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm’s representation of investors, please visit http://www.lieffcabraser.com.