Rayovac 2006 Annual Report Download - page 29

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 29 of the 2006 Rayovac annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 130

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123
  • 124
  • 125
  • 126
  • 127
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130

SPECTRUM BRANDS | 2006 ANNUAL REPORT 17
Facility Function
Global Pet
Mentor, Ohio (2) Aquatics Production Facility
Noblesville, Indiana (1) Aquatics Production Facility
Hauppauge, New York (2) Specialty Pet Facility
Moorpark, California (2) Aquatics Production Facility
Blacksburg, Virginia (1) Pet Supply Manufacturing, Assembly, Warehousing and Shipping
Melle, Germany (1) Pet Food and Pet Care Manufacturing
Melle, Germany (2) Pet Food and Pet Care Distribution
(1) Facility is owned.
(2) Facility is leased.
We also own, operate or contract with third parties to oper-
ate distribution centers, sales offi ces and administrative offi ces
throughout the world in support of our business. We lease our
administrative headquarters, located in Atlanta, Georgia, and our
primary research and development facility and North America
headquarters, located in Madison, Wisconsin.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Litigation
We are subject to litigation from time to time in the ordinary
course of business. The amount of any liability with respect to any
litigation to which we are now subject cannot currently be deter-
mined. Other than the matters set forth below, we are not party
to any pending legal proceedings which, in the opinion of man-
agement, are material or may be material to our business or
fi nancial condition.
On September 26, 2005, the Company, along with Chairman
and Chief Executive Offi cer David A. Jones, and Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Offi cer Randall J. Steward, were
named as defendants in a purported class action lawsuit captioned
Jain v. Spectrum Brands Inc., David A. Jones and Randall J. Steward, Civil
Action No. 05-2494-WSD, fi led in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia. The complaint alleges violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The action is
purportedly brought on behalf of all purchasers of our publicly-
traded securities between January 4, 2005 and September 6, 2005.
The plaintiff generally alleges that the Company and the individ-
ually named defendants made materially false and misleading
public statements concerning the Company’s operational and
fi nancial condition, thereby allegedly causing plaintiff to pur-
chase Company securities at artifi cially infl ated prices. The plain-
tiff seeks unspecifi ed damages, as well as interest, costs and
attorneys’ fees. Substantially similar actions, captioned Dague v.
Spectrum Brands Inc., David A. Jones and Randall J. Steward, Civil
Action No. 05-0580-C (fi led October 3, 2005 in the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Wisconsin) (the “Wisconsin
Action”) and Davies v. Spectrum Brands Inc., David A. Jones and Randall
J. Steward, Civil Action No. 05-2814 (fi led October 31, 2005 in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia)
were fi led by other purported class representatives. In addition, a
further action captioned Hunkapiller v. Spectrum Brands Inc., David
A. Jones and Randall J. Steward, Civil Action No. 05-2911-WSD
was fi led November 14, 2005 in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia and purportedly brought on behalf
of all purchasers of our publicly-traded securities between
January 4, 2005 and November 11, 2005. By Order dated
November 18, 2005, all cases pending in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia were consolidated (the
“Georgia Action”), and the Court entered a scheduling order
providing for the fi ling of a consolidated amended complaint
and briefi ng schedule for defendants’ motion to dismiss. On
December 22, 2005, plaintiff in the Wisconsin Action dismissed
the complaint.
On November 28, 2005, a motion was fi led in the Georgia
Action to appoint lead plaintiffs and approve selection of co-lead
counsel. On December 30, 2005, the Court entered an Order
granting plaintiffs’ motion. Pursuant to the scheduling order
entered on November 18, 2005, on February 2, 2006, lead plain-
tiffs fi led a consolidated amended complaint. On March 6, 2006,
Defendants fi led a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended
complaint. On October 27, 2006, the Court granted Defendants’
motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint, but the
Court granted plaintiffs 30 days to re-plead the complaint. On
November 22, 2006, plaintiffs fi led a motion seeking an exten-
sion of time to fi le an amended complaint and a partial lift of the
stay of discovery. Defendants have opposed this motion. We
believe that these actions are without merit and intend to contest
them vigorously. At this stage of the litigation, we cannot make
any estimate of a potential loss or range of loss.
2006 Form 10-K Annual Report
Spectrum Brands, Inc.