Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (“Robbins Geller”) ( http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/telenav/) today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of TeleNav, Inc. (“TeleNav”) (NASDAQ:TNAV) common stock pursuant to the Company’s false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with its May 13, 2010 initial public offering (“IPO”).
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Darren Robbins of Robbins Geller at 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058, or via e-mail at email@example.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/telenav/. 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 TeleNav, certain of its officers and directors and the underwriters of the IPO with violations of the Securities Act of 1933. TeleNav is a provider of wireless location-based services, including global positioning system (“GPS”) navigation, mobile resource management, asset GPS tracking and local search.
The complaint alleges that on May 13, 2010, TeleNav accomplished its IPO of 7 million shares of common stock at $8.00 per share for gross proceeds of $52.4 million to TeleNav (including over-allotments), pursuant to a false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus (collectively, the “Registration Statement”). According to the complaint, the Registration Statement failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (a) the Company would soon be renegotiating its current contract for TeleNav to provide Sprint Nextel Corporation (“Sprint”), its largest customer, with its Sprint Navigation application, which would result in lower overall revenues to TeleNav; (b) the unwillingness of Sprint to continue with the same contract terms beyond December 31, 2010 would not only mean lower revenues from Sprint, but had negative implications for TeleNav’s other wireless relationships; and (c) adverse changes to the Sprint relationship would cause TeleNav’s results to trend adversely compared to the trends included in the Registration Statement.