liaison counsel. On July 2, 2020, lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint. The consolidated complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants made materially false or misleading statements or omissions regarding the Company’s business, operations and growth prospects, specifically with respect to the development of its Six Flags branded parks in China and the financial health of its former partner, Riverside Investment Group Co. Ltd., in violation of the federal securities laws. The consolidated complaint seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages and other relief on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Holdings’ publicly traded common stock during the period between April 24, 2018 and February 19, 2020. On August 3, 2020, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint. On March 3, 2021, the district court granted defendants’ motion, dismissing the complaint in its entirety and with prejudice.
On August 25, 2021, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (“the Fifth Circuit”) from the district court’s decisions granting defendants’ motion to dismiss, denying plaintiffs’ motion to amend or set aside judgment, and denying plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a supplemental brief. Plaintiffs’ appeal is captioned Oklahoma Firefighters Pension & Ret. Sys. v. Six Flags Ent. Corp., et al., No. 21-10865 (5th Cir.). The appeal was fully briefed as of December 15, 2021, and oral argument was held on March 7, 2022. On January 18, 2023, the Fifth Circuit reversed the dismissal and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings. On February 9, 2023, the Fifth Circuit mandate issued to the district court.
We believe this lawsuit is without merit; however, there can be no assurance regarding the ultimate outcome. Regardless of the merit of plaintiffs’ claims, litigation may be expensive, time-consuming, disruptive to the Company’s operations and distracting to management. The outcome of this litigation is inherently uncertain, and we cannot reasonably estimate any loss or range of loss that may arise from this matter.
Stockholder Derivative Lawsuits
On March 20, 2020, a putative stockholder derivative lawsuit was filed on behalf of nominal defendant Holdings in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas against certain of its then-current and former executive officers and directors (the “individual defendants”) in an action captioned Schwartz v. Reid-Anderson, et al., Case No. 4:20-cv-00262-P (N.D. Tex.). In April 2020, two additional stockholder derivative lawsuits, making substantially identical allegations as the Schwartz complaint, were filed by Trustees of the St. Clair County Employees’ Retirement System and Mr. Mehmet Ali Albayrak in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in actions captioned Martin, et al. v. Reid-Anderson, et al., Case No. 4:20-cv-00311-P (N.D. Tex.) and Albayrak v. Reid-Anderson, et al., Case No. 4:20-cv-00312-P (N.D. Tex.), respectively. On April 8, 2020, plaintiffs in all three of these putative derivative actions moved to consolidate the actions and appoint lead counsel. On May 8, 2020, the district court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate. The consolidated action is captioned In re Six Flags Entertainment Corp. Derivative Litigation, Case No. 4:20-cv-00262-P (N.D. Tex.). On August 10, 2020, plaintiffs filed a consolidated derivative complaint. The consolidated derivative complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duty, insider selling, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, and contribution for violations of federal securities laws. The consolidated derivative complaint references, and makes many of the same allegations as are set forth in, the Electrical Workers litigation, alleging, among other things, that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties, committed waste, are liable for contribution for, or were unjustly enriched by making, failing to correct, or failing to implement adequate internal controls relating to alleged materially false or misleading statements or omissions regarding the Company’s business, operations and growth prospects, specifically with respect to the prospects of the development of Six Flags branded parks in China and the financial health of its former partner, Riverside Investment Group Co. Ltd. The consolidated derivative complaint also alleges that a former officer and director sold shares of the Company while allegedly in possession of material non-public information concerning the same. On September 9, 2020, Holdings and the individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint. On April 28, 2021, the district court granted defendants’ motion, dismissing the consolidated complaint in its entirety and with prejudice and denying leave to amend. Plaintiffs’ time to appeal the judgment dismissing this action in its entirety and with prejudice and denying leave to amend lapsed in May 2021.
On May 5, 2020, a putative stockholder derivative lawsuit was filed on behalf of nominal defendant Holdings, by Richard Francisco in Texas state court against certain of its then-current and former executive officers and directors (the “individual defendants”) in an action captioned Francisco v. Reid-Anderson, et al., Case No. DC-20-06425 (160th Dist. Ct., Dallas Cty., Tex.) (the “Francisco action”). The petition in the Francisco action alleges breach of fiduciary duty,