Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Opp Complaint Final 03-26-2012

Opp Complaint Final 03-26-2012

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,112|Likes:
Published by Fortune

More info:

Published by: Fortune on Mar 27, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/29/2012

pdf

text

original

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTSBROCKTON RETIREMENT BOARD,Individually and On Behalf of All OthersSimilarly Situated,Plaintiff,v.OPPENHEIMER GLOBAL RESOURCEPRIVATE EQUITY FUND I, L.P.,OPPENHEIMER ASSET MANAGEMENT,INC., OPPENHEIMER ALTERNATIVEINVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, LLC,OPPENHEIMER & CO. INC., BRIANWILLIAMSON, and PATRICK KANE.Defendants. No. ___________________________ CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERALSECURITIES LAWS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDEDINTRODUCTION
 Plaintiff Brockton Retirement Board (“Brockton” or “Plaintiff”), by its undersignedattorneys, alleges upon personal knowledge as to Plaintiff’s own acts, and upon information and belief as to all other matters, based on the investigation conducted by and through Plaintiff’scounsel, which included, among other things, a review of the Defendants’ documents andannouncements issued in connection with the private placement of limited partnership interestsin Oppenheimer Global Resource Private Equity Fund I, L.P. (“OGR Fund”), wire and pressreleases published by and regarding the OGR Fund, and advisories about the OGR Fund, andother information readily obtainable in the public domain.
 
2
I.
 
NATURE OF THE ACTION
 1.
 
This is a class action brought on behalf of investors who purchased interests in a private placement of unregistered limited partnership units pursuant to the OGR Fund’s private placement memorandum dated July 2008 (the “OGR PPM”) that was actively used by the OGR Fund to solicit investors. The OGR Fund is a limited partnership functioning as an investmentfund of funds designed to make global investments in natural resource-related companies.Specifically, as described by the OGR PPM, the OGR Fund is:[A] fund of private equity funds that intends to invest in natural resource, power generation and energy-related assets and their changing dynamics (collectively,“Natural Resource and Related Assets”) on a global basis including but notlimited to energy, timber, water, minerals, mined resources, agriculture and thetransportation, distribution, utilization, management and support of, andtechnologies being developed for, Natural Resource and Related Assets, andincluding, but not limited to, assets relating to the protection, renewal or replacement of environmentally protected or sensitive areas or wildlife such aswetlands and endangered species and their habitats.2.
 
In addition to the OGR PPM, Defendants solicited investors pursuant to a Requestfor Information and other materials circulated to investors between 2008 and 2010 (collectively,with the OGR PPM, the “Solicitation Documents”).3.
 
The Solicitation Documents contained materially untrue and misleadingstatements regarding: (i) the purported value of the OGR Fund’s holdings, (ii) the profitabilityand performance of the OGR Fund, and (iii) the policies and procedures to be used by the OGR Fund in conducting due diligence into the performance and valuation of its assets. Specifically,the Solicitation Documents overstated the value of the OGR Fund’s holdings as well as the OGR Fund’s profitability and financial performance due to a failure of the OGR Fund’s proceduresand in violation of applicable laws and standards.
 
34.
 
As a result of Defendants’ misleading statements, Plaintiff and other members of the Class have suffered significant damages.
II.
 
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5.
 
The claims alleged herein arise under Sections 12(a)(2) and 15 of the SecuritiesAct of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 77l(a)(2) and 77o, and the rules and regulationsof the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) promulgated thereunder.6.
 
This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant toSection 22(a) of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77v(a).7.
 
Venue is proper in this District pursuant to Section 22(a) of the Securities Act, 15U.S.C. § 77v(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(d).8.
 
In connection with the acts alleged in this complaint, Defendants, directly or indirectly, used the means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce, including, but notlimited to, the United States mails, interstate electronic communications, interstate telephonecommunications and the facilities of the national securities markets.
III.
 
PARTIES
 9.
 
Plaintiff Brockton Retirement Board is a public retirement system representingcurrent and former employees of the City of Brockton, Massachusetts. Brockton invested in theOGR Fund as set forth in the accompanying certification, incorporated by reference herein, andhas been damaged thereby. Defendants solicited Brockton to make its investment in the OGR Fund in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.10.
 
Defendant OGR Fund is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of  business located in New York, New York.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->