SAN DIEGO, April 23, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Finkelstein & Krinsk LLP of San Diego, CA, has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California at San Diego on behalf of a class (the "Class") comprised of purchasers of Maxwell Technologies, Inc. ("Maxwell" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: MXWL), common stock from April 28, 2011 through March 7, 2013, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The Complaint alleges that Maxwell and certain of its executive officers issued false and/or misleading statements concerning the Company's business, operations and prospects. Maxwell announced on March 7, 2013 that its earlier financial statements contained in its annual report for the year ended December 31, 2011, and unaudited quarterly reports in 2011 and 2012, should no longer be relied upon because of erroneous financial statements. These errors relate to the timing of recognition of revenue from sales. Maxwell also disclosed that "as a result of its investigation, certain employees were terminated and the Sr. Vice President of Sales and Marketing resigned...." On this news, the Company's shares declined $1.01 per share (on March 8, 2013), to close at $8.10 per share -- a one-day decline of 11%. The Complaint alleges that Maxwell made false statements and didn't disclose: (1) that employees of the Company were making arrangements with distributors regarding payment terms for sales that were improper; (2) that these arrangements were not shared with Maxwell's accounting department; (3) that these arrangements were not considered when Maxwell recorded revenue; (4) that the arrangements included unspecified pricing; (5) that collection was not reasonably assured for certain transactions; (6) that Maxwell nonetheless was improperly recognizing revenue; (7) that the Company's financial results were therefore not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); (8) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (9) as a result of the above, the Company's earlier statements were materially wrong.