Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Body Central Corporation

WILMINGTON, Del.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the securities of Body Central Corporation (“Body Central” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ GS: BODY) between November 10, 2011 and June 18, 2012, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers and directors (the “Complaint”).

“revising sales and earning guidance for its second quarter and full year 2012.”

If you purchased shares of Body Central during the Class Period and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, NY at [phone], by e-mail to [e-mail], or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/body-central-corporation-body.

Body Central, a Delaware corporation headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida, is a multi-channel specialty retailer offering on-trend, quality apparel and accessories at value prices. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business operations, financial condition and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges (1) that the Company’s merchandise miss was not an isolated, quickly fixable event, but would take at least several quarters to remedy and would have a material, negative impact on the Company’s financial results; (2) that the Company’s stores were experiencing increasingly poor performance and financial results; (3) that the Defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s operations and its business and financial results and outlook; and (4) that based on the above, Defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company or its revenue outlook. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading statements, the Company’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.

According to the Complaint, on May 3, 2012, the Company issued a press release announcing its first quarter 2012 financial results. Among other things, the Company unexpected issued a weak forecast for the second quarter and full year earnings, pointing to an expected decrease in comparable store sales. On this news, shares of the Company declined more than 48% from a close of $28.92 per share on May 3, 2012 to $14.88 per share on May 4, 2012, on trading volume of over 4.3 million shares.

Then, on June 18, 2012, the Company issued a press release “revising sales and earning guidance for its second quarter and full year 2012.” In the release, the Company stated that it expected comparable sales to decrease in a range of 7 to 9 percent for the second quarter of fiscal 2012, and 4 to 6 percent for the full fiscal year. On this news, shares of the Company declined more than 48% from a close of $15.99 per share on June 15, 2012 to $8.22 per share on June 18, 2012, on trading volume of over 14.4 million shares.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October 29, 2012. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

While Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. did not file the Complaint in this matter, the firm, with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.