In re Petrobras Securities Litigation



  1. Class Action Law Suit
    • A class action law suit is now pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the caption: In re Petrobras Securities Litigation (No. 14-CV-9662 (JSR)), alleging violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, as well as Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933. The suit is brought on behalf of investors for alleged violations of the federal securities laws by defendants for purportedly concealing a multi-year, multi-billion dollar bribery and kickback scheme.
    • A class action is a type of lawsuit in which one or several individuals or entities prosecute claims on behalf of all members of a group of similarly-situated persons and entities to obtain monetary or other relief for the benefit of the entire group, known as a class. Class actions are used to decide legal and factual issues that are common to all members of a class.
  2. Class Members and Exclusions Procedures
    • If you are a Class Member in this class action your rights might be affected.
    • The Classes includes:
      1. All purchasers who, between January 22, 2010 and July 28, 2015 (the “Class Period”), inclusive, purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. – Petrobras (“Petrobras”), including debt securities issued by Petrobras International Finance Company S.A. (“PifCo”) and/or Petrobras Global Finance B.V. (“PGF”) on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) or pursuant to other domestic transactions (the “Exchange Act Class”); and
      2. All purchasers who purchased or otherwise acquired debt securities issued by Petrobras, PifCo, and/or PGF, in domestic transactions, directly in, pursuant and/or traceable to a May 13, 2013 public offering registered in the United States and/or a March 10, 2014 public offering registered in the United States before Petrobras made generally available to its security holders an earnings statement covering a period of at least twelve months beginning after the effective date of the offerings (the “Securities Act Class”).
    • If you are uncertain whether you are a member of either of the Classes, contact Class Counsel, or consult your own attorney.
    • If you choose to remain a member of one or both of the Classes, you do not need to do anything at this time. You will be automatically included in either or both Classes unless you requested exclusion.
    • The deadline to exclude yourself has passed. Your request for exclusion must have been postmarked no later than July 29, 2016.
  3. Securities
    • CUSIPS of the debt securities and ADRs involved in this litigation are as follows: US71647NAC39; US71647NAB55; US71647NAF69; US71647NAA72; US71647NAD12; US71647NAE94; US71647NAG43; US71647NAH26; US71647NAM11; US71647NAK54; US71647NAJ81; US71647NAL38; US71654V1017; and US71654V4086
  4. Defendants
    • The defendants include Petrobras, PGF, Petrobras America Inc., Theodore Marshall Helms, PricewaterhouseCoopers Auditores Independentes, Maria das Graças Silva Foster, José Sérgio Gabrielli de Azevedo, Almir Guilherme Barbassa, Paulo Roberto Costa, José Carlos Cosenza, Renato de Souza Duque, Guilherme de Oliveira Estrella, Jose Miranda Formigli Filho, Silvio Sinedino Pinheiro, Daniel Lima de Oliveira, José Raimundo Brandao Pereira, Servio Tulio da Rosa Tinoco, Paulo José Alves, Gustavo Tardin Barbosa, Alexandre Quintão Fernandes, Marcos Antonio Zacarias, Cornelis Franciscus Jozef Looman, and the following underwriter defendants – BB Securities Ltd., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Itau BBA USA Securities, Inc., Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, HSBC Securities (USA) Inc., Mitsubishi UFJ Securities (USA), Inc., Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Standard Chartered Bank, Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited, Banco Bradesco BBI S.A., Banca IMI S.p.A., and Scotia Capital (USA) Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”). Defendants have denied the claims and maintain they are not liable for the injury alleged.
  5. Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel
    • By Order dated March 4, 2015, the Court appointed Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited (“USS”) as Lead Plaintiff and appointed Pomerantz LLP as Lead Counsel pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. On February 2, 2016, the Court certified two classes – a Securities Act Class and an Exchange Act Class as defined above. The Court also appointed (i) USS as Class Representative for the Exchange Act Class, (ii) additional plaintiffs North Carolina Department of State Treasurer and Employees' Retirement System of the State of Hawaii as Class Representatives for the Securities Act Class; and (iii) Pomerantz LLP as Class Counsel. Defendants deny that this is a proper class action and have appealed the order certifying the Classes.
  6. Second Circuit
    • Please note that on August 2, 2016, the Second Circuit issued a Stay pending an appeal in this case. Click here to view the Stay Order, which can also be accessed in the Court Documents section of this website. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral argument on November 2, 2016.
    • On July 7, 2017, the Second Circuit affirmed in part, and vacated and remanded in part. The court rejected Defendants' claim that class certification was inappropriate for failure to prove ascertainability, but vacated the district court's certification orders and remanded for further consideration because the district court had not evaluated the effect of a certain Supreme Court decision on the predominance requirement. The Second Circuit took no position on the question leaving adjudication of the predominance question to the district court.
    • The Second Circuit also rejected Defendants' argument that class certification was inappropriate for certain claims because reliance had to be proved individually, and that the district court erred in ruling that Plaintiffs could prove reliance on a class-wide basis. Click here to view the Second Circuit decision. Additionally, the Second Circuit denied Defendants' petition for rehearing en banc. Click here to view the order denying the petition for rehearing en banc.
  7. Supreme Court
    • On November 1, 2017, Defendants filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States. Plaintiffs responded to the petition on November 14, 2017. The case is currently stayed until the Supreme Court rules on Defendants' petition. Click here to view Defendants' petition and here to view Plaintiffs' response.
  8. Partial Settlement
    • Plaintiffs and the Petrobras Defendants have agreed to settle the case for $2.95 billion which represents the fifth largest settlement in United States class action history and the largest class action settlement in a decade. Plaintiffs will file a motion for preliminary approval no later than January 31, 2018. Plaintiffs still have an outstanding claim against PricewaterhouseCoopers Auditores Independentes.

Please refer back to this website for further updates.