Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.:
- Do you, or did you, own shares of L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: LLL )?
- Did you purchase your shares before April 25, 2013, or between April 25, 2013 and July 30, 2014, inclusive?
- Did you lose money in your investment in L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc.?
- Do you want to discuss your rights?
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., including former Special Assistant United States Attorney, Timothy J. MacFall, announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. (“L-3” or the “Company”) (NYSE: LLL) between April 25, 2013 and July 30, 2014, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers (the “Complaint”).
If you purchased shares of L-3 during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold L-3, and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 2 Righter Parkway, Suite 120, Wilmington, DE 19803 at (888) 969-4242; by e-mail to email@example.com; or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/l-3-communications-holdings-inc-lll.
L-3 is a prime contractor in aerospace systems and national security solutions. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and omitted materially adverse facts, about the Company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants concealed from the investing public that: (1) L-3’s financial statements contained errors related to the improper deferral of cost overruns on a fixed-price maintenance and logistics supports contract resulting in overstatement of operating income; (2) net sales with respect to the fixed-price maintenance and logistics support contract were overstated; (3) the Company lacked adequate internal and control over financial reporting; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s financial statement were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. As a result of defendants’ alleged false and misleading statements, the Company’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.