Capri Holdings Lawsuit Submission Form

The filed complaint alleges that Capri Holdings Limited made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (a) the accessible luxury handbag market is a distinct and well-defined market within the overall handbag market and understood as such by the Individual defendants, as well as by other Capri and Tapestry executives; (b) Capri and Tapestry maintained analogous production facilities and supply chains for their accessible luxury handbags that were distinct from the production facilities and supply chains used to manufacture luxury or mass market handbags, confirming that the accessible luxury handbag market is distinct from the mass market and luxury handbag markets; (c) Capri and Tapestry internally considered Coach and Michael Kors to be each other’s closest and most direct competitors; (d) conversely, Capri and Tapestry did not internally consider their handbag brands to be in direct competition with luxury handbags or mass market handbags; (e) a primary internal rationale for the Capri Acquisition, the acquisition of Capri by Tapestry, was to consolidate prevalent brands within the accessible luxury handbag market so as to reduce competition, increase prices, improve profit margins, and reduce consumer choice within that market; and (f) as a result of (a)-(e) above, the risk of adverse regulatory actions and/or the Capri Acquisition being blocked was materially higher than represented by defendants.