|6 Months Ended|
Jul. 30, 2016
15. Legal Matters
On March 29, 2016, Peter Makhlouf filed a putative class action lawsuit against the Company and its Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"), Douglas S. Ewert, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Case No. 4:16-cv-00838). The complaint attempts to allege claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of a putative class of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company's securities between June 18, 2014 and December 9, 2015. In particular, the complaint alleges that the Company and its CEO made certain statements about the Company's acquisition and subsequent integration of Jos. A. Bank that were false and misleading and omitted material facts. We believe that the claims are without merit and intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously. The range of loss, if any, is not reasonably estimable at this time. We do not currently believe, however, that it will have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
On July 9, 2014, David Lucas and Eric Salerno, on behalf of themselves and all California residents similarly situated, filed a putative class action Complaint against Jos. A. Bank in the U.S. District Court for Southern California (Case No. ‘14CV1631LAB JLB). The Complaint alleges, among other things, that Jos. A. Bank violated the California Unfair Competition Law and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act with its comparative price advertising, price discounts and free apparel promotions. The Complaint seeks, among other relief, certification of the case as a class action, permanent injunction, actual and compensatory damages, restitution including disgorgement of profits and unjust enrichment, costs and attorney fees. Mr. Salerno subsequently withdrew from the case leaving Mr. Lucas as the sole named plaintiff. In July 2016 several key events occurred. Over the course of several days, the Plaintiff’s counsel withdrew the plaintiff’s motion for class certification, filed a motion to dismiss the case, with prejudice, and filed a motion to withdraw as counsel to Mr. Lucas. The Court granted plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to withdraw. The motion to dismiss is still pending before the Court. As a result, this case will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows, and we will no longer be reporting on this matter in subsequent filings.
In addition, we are involved in various routine legal proceedings, including ongoing litigation, incidental to the conduct of our business. Management does not believe that any of these matters will have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
The entire disclosure for legal proceedings, legal contingencies, litigation, regulatory and environmental matters and other contingencies.
No definition available.