Dentsply Investors Get Class Status in Securities-Fraud Suit

Investors suing Dentsply Sirona Inc. over alleged misleading information about the financial health of the dental products company can proceed as a class, according to a court order.

The investors met class certification requirements including numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York said Thursday. The district court rejected Dentsply’s argument that the investors’ damages model failed under US Supreme Court precedent.

More than a thousand institutions held Dentsply stock, an average of 9.6 million shares of Dentsply common stock traded weekly, and Dentsply had about 215 million shares outstanding,” so investors clearly meet numerosity requirements, Judge Arun Subramanian said for the court.

The investors, which include multiple pension plans, alleged that Dentsply’s former chief executive officer Donald M. Casey Jr., chief financial officer Jorge Gomez, and chief accounting officer Ranjit S. Chadha told investors that the company was doing just fine while artificially inflating sales by forcing distributors to take on more inventory using a technique called channel stuffing, according to a previous opinion in May 2024. Chadha is no longer a defendant in the case.

They allegedly shared this deceptive information during the Covid-19 pandemic, when the dental industry faced supply chain issues and lack of demand for professional dental products and many dentist offices had to shut down.

The investors had sued alleging that the defendants made dozens of statements about the supply chain, the inventory, the product quality, and the company’s overall health that were misleading and violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5.

The investors’ claims are based on defendants’ allegedly deceptive conduct, and each class member alleges that Dentsply’s scheme and misrepresentation propped the company stock prices, in violation of securities laws, Subramanian said Thursday. And plaintiffs’ claims are identical to those of all class members, he added.

“Like most other securities actions, a class action efficiently and effectively provides recourse to Dentsply’s many stockholders, while avoiding inconsistent rulings and proliferating litigation,” he said.

Dentsply will have an opportunity to challenge the investors’ proof of loss causation damages at summary judgment, after discovery is complete, the judge said.

He certified a class of all persons and entities who purchased the publicly traded common stock of Dentsply between June 9, 2021 and Nov. 13, 2022.

Dentsply didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP was appointed class counsel. Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP represents Dentsply. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP represents Casey. Levine Lee LLP represents Gomez.

The case is San Antonio Fire and Police Pension Fund v. Dentsply Sirona, Inc., S.D.N.Y., No. 1:22-cv-06339, 7/10/25.