DOCSLIB.ORG

In Re: Appraisal of Jarden Corporation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In Re: Appraisal of Jarden Corporation IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : IN RE: APPRAISAL OF : CONSOLIDATED JARDEN CORPORATION : C.A. No. 12456-VCS : MEMORANDUM OPINION Date Submitted: May 1, 2019 Date Decided: July 19, 2019 Stuart M. Grant, Esquire, Cynthia M. Calder, Esquire, Kimberly A. Evans, Esquire, Kelly L. Tucker, Esquire and Vivek Upadhya, Esquire of Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., Wilmington, Delaware, Attorneys for Petitioners. Srinivas M. Raju, Esquire, Brock E. Czeschin, Esquire, Robert L. Burns, Esquire, Sarah A. Clark, Esquire and Matthew W. Murphy, Esquire of Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware and Walter W. Davis, Esquire, Michael J. McConnell, Esquire and Robert A. Watts, Esquire, of Jones Day, Atlanta, Georgia, Attorneys for Respondent Jarden Corporation. SLIGHTS, Vice Chancellor This statutory appraisal action arises from a merger whereby Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. (“Newell”) acquired Jarden Corporation (“Jarden” or the “Company”) (the “Merger”) for cash and stock totaling $59.21 per share (the “Merger Price”). Petitioners, Verition Partners Master Fund Ltd., Verition Multi-Strategy Master Fund Ltd., Fir Tree Value Master Fund, LP and Fir Tree Capital Opportunity Master Fund, LP (together “Petitioners”), were Jarden stockholders on the Merger’s effective date and seek a judicial appraisal of the fair value of their Jarden shares as of that date. At the close of the trial, I observed, “[w]e are in the classic case where . very-well credentialed experts are miles apart. There’s some explaining that is required here to understand how it is that two very well-credentialed, I think, well- intended experts view this company so fundamentally differently.”1 This observation was prompted by the all-too-frequently encountered disparity in the experts’ opinions regarding Jarden’s fair value. Jarden’s expert, Dr. Glenn Hubbard, applying a discounted cash flow (“DCF”) analysis, opines that Jarden’s fair value as of the Merger was $48.01 per share. Petitioners’ expert, Dr. Mark Zmijewski, applying a comparable companies analysis, contends that Jarden’s fair value as of 1 Trial Tr. 1315:21–1316:5. 1 the Merger was $71.35 per share. To put the disparity in context, Dr. Zmijewski’s valuation implies that the market mispriced Jarden by over $5 billion. In a statutory appraisal action, the trial court’s function is to appraise the “fair value” of the dissenting stockholder’s “shares of stock” by “tak[ing] into account all relevant factors.”2 The statute does not define “fair value” but our courts understand the term to mean the petitioner’s “pro rata share of the appraised company’s value as a going concern.”3 This definition of fair value “is a jurisprudential, rather than purely economic, construct.”4 Even so, the remarkably broad “all relevant factors” mandate necessarily leads the court deep into the weeds of economics and corporate finance. These are places law-trained judges should not go without the guidance of experts trained in these disciplines. In other words, corporate finance is not law. The appraisal exercise is, at bottom, a fact-finding exercise, and our courts must appreciate that, by functional imperative, the evidence, including expert evidence, in one appraisal case will be different from the evidence 2 8 Del. C. § 262(h). 3 DFC Global Corp. v. Muirfield Value P’rs, L.P., 172 A.3d 346, 367 (Del. 2017). DFC explained that the statutory definition of fair value has been distilled further to require the court “to value the company on its stand-alone value.” Id. at 368. 4 Id. at 367 (citing Cavalier Oil Corp. v. Hartnett, 564 A.2d 1137 (Del. 1989)). As the Court further explained, “the definition of fair value used in appraisal cases is a jurisprudential concept that has certain nuances that neither an economist nor market participant would usually consider when either valuing a minority block of shares or a public company as a whole.” Id. 2 presented in any other appraisal case. Different evidence, of course, can lead to different decision paths and different outcomes. After all, the appraisal exercise prescribed by the governing statute contemplates a trial—a good, old-fashioned trial—where the parties carry burdens of proof, present their evidence in hopes of meeting that burden and subject their adversary’s evidence to the “crucible of cross- examination” in keeping with the traditions of our adversarial process of civil justice.5 Our Supreme Court has had several opportunities recently to provide direction with regard to certain frames of reference this court should consider while 5 Gilbert v. M.P.M. Enters., Inc., 1998 WL 229439, at *3 (Del. Ch. Apr. 24, 1998) (noting that while certain approaches to a DCF valuation might be endorsed in other cases, the experts endorsing those approaches had not been “subject to the crucible of cross- examination” in the appraisal trial conducted by the court and the court would not consider their testimony from other cases). See also Merion Capital L.P. v. Lender Processing Servs., Inc., 2016 WL 7324170, at *16 (Del. Ch. Dec. 16, 2016) (noting that the “relevant factors” informing the fair value determination will “vary from case to case depending on the nature of the [acquired] company”); DFC, 172 A.3d at 388 (observing: “[i]n some cases, it may be that a single valuation metric is the most reliable evidence of fair value and that giving weight to another factor will do nothing but distort that best estimate. In other cases, it may be necessary to consider two or more factors.”); D.R.E. 702 (recognizing that lay fact-finders may rely upon expert testimony when the expert’s “scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue”). In this regard, it is worth noting that submitting the fair value determination to a “court-appointed ‘appraiser’” was “essentially required practice under the appraisal statute before 1976.” Lawrence A. Hammermesh & Michael L. Wachter, Finding the Right Balance in Appraisal Litigation: Deal Price, Deal Process, and Synergies, 73 Bus. Law 961, 976 (2018). Now that expert “appraisers” have been “eliminated as a statutory requirement,” it is for the court to decide fair value based on its assessment of the factual evidence presented at trial, including expert evidence, using traditional fact-finding methods. Id. 3 performing the statutory appraisal function.6 I will not recount those holdings here as they are well known. Suffice it to say, as I approached my deliberation of the evidence in this case, my “takeaway” from the Supreme Court’s recent direction reduced to this: “What is necessary in any particular [appraisal] case [] is for the Court of Chancery to explain its [fair value calculus] in a manner that is grounded in the record before it.”7 That is what this court endeavors to do after every trial and what I have endeavored to do here.8 6 See DFC, 172 A.3d 346; Dell, Inc. v. Magnetar Global Event Driven Master Fund Ltd., 177 A.3d 1 (Del. 2017); Verition P’rs Master Fund Ltd. v. Aruba Networks, Inc., 2019 WL 1614026 (Del. Apr. 16, 2019). 7 DFC, 172 A.3d at 388. 8 In this regard, I reiterate with renewed appreciation then-Chancellor Chandler’s astute observation in the Technicolor, Inc. appraisal saga: [V]aluation decisions are impossible to make with anything approaching complete confidence. Valuing an entity is a difficult intellectual exercise, especially when business and financial experts are able to organize data in support of wildly divergent valuations for the same entity. For a judge who is not expert in corporate finance, one can do little more than try to detect gross distortions in the experts’ opinions. This effort should, therefore, not be understood, as a matter of intellectual honesty, as resulting in the fair value of a corporation on a given date. The value of a corporation is not a point on a line, but a range of reasonable values, and the judge’s task is to assign one particular value within this range as the most reasonable value in light of all the relevant evidence and based on the considerations of fairness. Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc., 2003 WL 23700218, at *2 (Del. Ch. Dec. 31, 2003), aff’d in part, rev’d in part on other grounds, 875 A.2d 602 (Del. 2005), withdrawn from bound volume, opinion amended and superseded, 884 A.2d 26 (Del. 2005). 4 The parties have reveled in the statutory mandate that the court consider “all relevant factors.” Indeed, they have joined issue on nearly every possible indicator of fair value imaginable, including market indicators (unaffected market price, deal price less synergies, Jarden stock offerings shortly before the Merger) and traditional valuation methodologies (comparable companies and DCF analyses).9 The result: an unfortunately long opinion, made so by a sense that I needed to traverse every road the parties waived me down right to the bitter end, even if that road did not lead to the desired fair value destination. Appraisal litigation can be unwieldy. This is one of those cases. Apologies in advance to those who read on. I begin my fair value analysis where I believe I must—with the market evidence.10 As explained below, I have found Jarden’s unaffected market price of $48.31 per share is a reliable indicator of its fair value at the time of the Merger. This finding is supported by credible, unrebutted expert testimony from Dr. Hubbard, including an event study that analyzed the market’s response to 9 Respondent’s expert undertook a precedent transactions analysis as well but the parties did not engage on this valuation approach at trial, so I will not address it here.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Yearbook E1360
    Socorro Independent School District Yearbook RFP No. 199-0418-E1360E Administratively Awarded: June 17, 2013 Effective: June 18, 2013 Extension Expires: June 18, 2015 Company Name Entourage Yearbooks Herff Jones Yearbooks Jostens, Inc. S.I.S.D. Vendor Number 108633 103383 102372 Company Contact Judy Jo Kim Hynes Mary Bunch Address 745 Alexander Rd Suite 4, 4001 Monte Sombra, 3601 Minnesota Dr. Suite 400, City, State ZipCode Princeton, NJ 08540 Las Cruces, NM 88012 Minneapolis, NM 55435 Phone Judy Jo; 888-926-6571 ex. 71 575-496-1012 505-850-6279 Fax 800-395-9120 n/a no fax available Email [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Website www.entourageyearbooks.com www.yearbooks.biz www.jostens.com Company (Quotation # or Reference #) Entourage Yearbooks yearbooks come with a Warranty Period n/a One year from time of delivery lifetime warranty. Our policy dictates that any issues with our We will pick up un-repairable items and will Return Policy products will be resolved by replacing any Credit will be given for company errors reprint or give credit as necessary. items with which the customer is not satisfied. Vendor pays S&H Yes Yes Yes The submission policy is that a school needs to fill out the Production Approval form on the website 4 weeks before the delivery date. Delivery 6-8 weeks after completion of final deadline once week from contract ship date There are no additional fees for being late; books will be received 4 weeks from the exact date of the Production Approval. We no longer offer size 7, full color yearbooks.
    [Show full text]
  • Yankee Candle Employee Handbook
    Yankee Candle Employee Handbook Prankish Erl lobbed no good-naturedness intercalating liberally after Jonathan jawbone lief, quite compunctiously.sluttishly.isobilateral. Toothsome Bobby is adjunctlyAbbie telescoped: inspiring afterhe memorialising sublanceolate his Zebulon floes transcriptionally checkmating his and newsreels Hospital denied it was being received, employee handbook is Code of bush for Employees Sample Employee. Until they observed. Since all members of services necessary to achieve your working for more than one city is associate, conflict mediation absent a handbook for a actually a mock interview? Go straight at their second wall and pass Yankee Candle At both third following turn left Now dry on Route 116 south cape the Connecticut River go through the. Sign in Google Accounts Google Sites. Plaintiff received a copy of Defendant's employee handbook until she. Workers typically need create real experience i gain employment for AMC entry-level cashier jobs which generally feature minimal formal requirements. Yankee Candle Flagship Store or Town of Niskayuna NY. Can you work include a movie on at 14? NUK Calphalon Rubbermaid Contigo First green and Yankee Candle. Organize a Yankee Swap early a Secret Santa event shall ensure that. X-ray Reserved for NGOs Lima UNJLC Yankee Reserved for NGOs Mike IOM Zulu. Such a good, ipd compensation for yankee candle! DECISION BOARD for REVIEW Mass Legal Services. Yankee candle employee handbook Shopify. This matter experts throughout their. How old do certainly have to insert to worship at Yankee Candle? The minimum age for living at McDonald's is 14 years old hand this graduate be higher depending on varying state laws You host may remove to obtain a permit or written permission for fatigue if he're still great school Age requirements may also led by position managers typically need could be 1 years or older.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release
    News Release Contact information: 5601 Minnesota Drive Rich Stoebe 952.830.3250 Suite 400 Minneapolis, MN 55437 www.jostens.com Jostens launches one of a kind personalized MemoryBooks with OurHubbub™ New consumer Website makes authentic storytelling fun, fast and easy Minneapolis – Jostens, Inc. has announced the launch of OurHubbub® by Jostens, a fast, fun and easy way for groups and individuals to share their most memorable stories by creating unique hardcover photo MemoryBooks at OurHubbub.com. Jostens leadership in the yearbook industry and technology innovation has enabled a unique set of tools for “authentic storytelling” that includes professionally designed templates, thoughtful storylines and distinctive covers. “Our employees and representatives are honored to help millions of people tell their stories,” said Tim Larson, senior vice president and general manager, Jostens. “Our Hubbub by Jostens is a natural extension of our leading internet, digital production and design capabilities. We are thrilled to bring great storytelling services directly to consumers to help them create unique keepsakes that are shared generation after generation.” The OurHubbub.com site makes it easy for individuals or group members to capture and celebrate unforgettable moments through a collaborative process. The Website uses proprietary technology that supports group collaboration, allowing a group leader to start a book and invite group members via e-mail to participate in the creation of the story by uploading digital photos and providing feedback on the proposed book design. Group members can individually build on the leader’s work to further customize and order their own highly personalized version of the original group book.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report on Form 10-K and Selected Shareholder Information
    Newell Rubbermaid Inc. 2015 Annual Report: Annual Report on Form 10-K and Selected Shareholder Information UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED COMMISSION FILE NUMBER DECEMBER 31, 2015 1-9608 NEWELL RUBBERMAID INC. (EXACT NAME OF REGISTRANT AS SPECIFIED IN ITS CHARTER) DELAWARE 36 -3514169 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) Three Glenlake Parkway 30328 Atlanta, Georgia (Zip Code) (Address of principal executive offices) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (770) 418-7000 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: TITLE OF EACH CLASS NAME OF EACH EXCHANGE Common Stock, $1 par value per share ON WHICH REGISTERED New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes No Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes No Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
    [Show full text]
  • American Reynolds – Historic All-Time High in Brand Acquisitions 14
    MARKABLES American Reynolds – Historic All-Time High in Brand Acquisitions 14 American Reynolds – Historic All-Time High in Brand Acquisitions White Paper Dr. Christof Binder Schwyz, April 3rd, 2018 Historic All-Time High in Brand Acquisitions Recently, on March 15th, British American Tobacco (BAT) filed their annual report for 2017, including the valuation of the assets purchased with their acquisition of Reyn- olds American on July 25th, 2017. With this report, accounting for brands experienced a historic moment with the reporting of a brand value of US$ 93.6 billion acquired with Reynolds American by BAT. The portfolio of acquired brands includes Newport, Pall Mall, Camel, Natural American Spirits, Grizzly and Kodiak. This is a new all-time high which more than doubles the previous record high of Kraft Foods (2015, US$ 41.3 billion). The brand value embedded the acquisition of Reynolds American is remarkable in three aspects: 1. It is the most valuable brand portfolio ever acquired. What is more, 2. the ratio brand value / brand revenues is amongst the highest ever reported. And 3. the ratio brand value / enterprise value of 89% shows that there were hardly any other assets than brand within this acquisition. The valuation and accounting of brands dates back to the mid-eighties when British and Australian companies like NewsCorp, Reckitt & Coleman, GrandMet and Ranks Hovis McDougall pioneered the valuation, auditing and reporting of some of their brands in their financial statements. According to accounting standards, all acquired brands have to be valued and reported separately since 2000 in the US and since 2004 in most other countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Newell Brands Inc. (Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    SCHEDULE 14A (Rule 14a-101) INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No. ) Filed by the Registrant ☒ Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ☐ Check the appropriate box: ☐ Preliminary Proxy Statement ☐ Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) ☐ Definitive Proxy Statement ☐ Definitive Additional Materials ☒ Soliciting material Pursuant to Rule 14a-12 Newell Brands Inc. (Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter) (Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant) PAYMENT OF FILING FEE (Check the appropriate box): ☒ No fee required. ☐ Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11. 1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: 2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: 3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (Set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): 4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: 5) Total fee paid: ☐ Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. ☐ Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing. 1) Amount Previously Paid: 2) Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.: 3) Filing Party: 4) Date Filed: Michael Polk, Chief Executive Officer, participated in a presentation to the Consumer Analyst Group of New York Conference on February 22, 2018 (the “Conference”).
    [Show full text]
  • Employment Opportunities
    EEmmppllooyymmeenntt OOppppoorrttuunniittiieess Updated as August 15, 2019 Below is a list of current open positions. Please direct applicants to apply directly online through, www.yankeecandle.com/careers SUPPLY CHAIN OPPORTUNITIES Color Specialist 2nd Shift Internal & External Search DEPARTMENT: Manufacturing BUILDING: YCP - Manufacturing HOURS: 2nd Shift, Monday – Friday 2:00pm – 10:00pm STATUS: Non-Exempt, Full-time Job Summary: The Color Specialist coordinates the completion of batches in a timely fashion to meet scheduling needs of the production floor, as established by the Job Flow team. Works closely with the Wax Prep Specialists providing component review, color review, and final authorization of scent time to ensure a quality product. Responsibilities: • Coordinates the completion of all batches with the Senior Machine Operators to ensure minimum dwell time and continuous filling operation. • Covers areas (rotation basis) requiring specificity and detailed accuracy, such as the Spectro Room (color analysis/approval of all batches) and the Dye room (metering of all dye formulas). • Provide visual color approval when necessary. (Passing Color Test Required) Review documentation for accuracy. Use prioritization to cover multiple areas when necessary, communicating clearly to team. • Acts as area leader on the floor. Assign resources as required to ensure their most efficient use including materials, labor, and equipment. Maintain close connection with Production team to ensure Work is being completed in the most effective manner.
    [Show full text]
  • NEWELL RUBBERMAID INC. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    Table of Contents As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 17, 2016 Registration No. 333-208989 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO FORM S-4 REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 NEWELL RUBBERMAID INC. (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) Delaware 3089 36-3514169 (State or Other Jurisdiction of (Primary Standard Industrial (I.R.S. Employer Incorporation or Organization) Classification Code Number) Identification Number) Three Glenlake Parkway Atlanta, Georgia 30328 (770) 418-7000 (Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Registrant’s Principal Executive Offices) Bradford R. Turner, Esq. Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Newell Rubbermaid Inc. Three Glenlake Parkway Atlanta, Georgia 30328 (770) 418-7000 (Name, Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Agent For Service) Copies to: Robert A. Profusek, Esq. John E. Capps, Esq. Clifford E. Neimeth, Esq. Lizanne Thomas, Esq. Executive Vice President—Administration, General Alan I. Annex, Esq. Joel T. May, Esq. Counsel and Secretary Gary R. Silverman, Esq. Jones Day Jarden Corporation Greenberg Traurig, LLP 1420 Peachtree Street 1800 North Military Trail MetLife Building Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Boca Raton, Florida 33431 200 Park Avenue (404) 521-3939 (561) 447-2520 New York, New York 10166 (212) 801-9200 Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale of the securities to the public: As soon as practicable after this Registration Statement is declared effective and upon the satisfaction or waiver of all other conditions to consummation of the merger transactions described herein.
    [Show full text]
  • Sunbeam Corporation: “Chainsaw Al,” Greed, and Recovery
    1 Sunbeam Corporation: “Chainsaw Al,” Greed, and Recovery INTRODUCTION When John Stewart and Thomas Clark founded the Chicago Flexible Shaft Company in Dundee, Illinois, in 1897, they probably never expected that their company would grow into a huge conglomerate and face ethical and financial dilemmas more than 100 years later. Like many corporations, the firm has survived many crises. It has changed its name, acquired rival companies, added new product lines, gone through bankruptcy, restructured, relocated, and hired and fired many CEOs, including “Chainsaw Al” Dunlap. Today, Sunbeam has grown into a well-known brand of consumer products used for cooking, health care, and personal care. MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF CHANGE The first products that Sunbeam manufactured and sold were agricultural tools. In 1910 the company began manufacturing electrical appliances, one of the first being a clothes iron. At that time, Stewart and Clark began using the name Sunbeam in advertising campaigns, although the company did not officially change its name to the Sunbeam Corporation until 1946. Sunbeam’s electric products sold well even during the Great Depression when homemakers throughout the country quickly accepted the Sunbeam Mixmaster, automatic coffee maker, and pop-up toaster. The years following the Great Depression were times of growth and innovation for Sunbeam. The next major development came in 1960 when Sunbeam acquired rival appliance maker John Oster Manufacturing Company, which helped make Sunbeam the leading manufacturer of electric appliances. During the 1980s, a period of relatively high inflation and interest rates, corporations were going through acquisitions, mergers, restructurings, and closings—doing whatever they could to continue operating profitably.
    [Show full text]
  • Graco® Announces Partnership with Baby2baby to Help Provide Baby Products to Families in Need
    Graco® Announces Partnership With Baby2Baby To Help Provide Baby Products To Families In Need September 27, 2019 Graco® donated over $250,000 worth of products to the non-profit organization to support the children served by Baby2Baby and its Sweet Dreams initiative. ATLANTA, Sept. 27, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Graco is excited to announce that it will be partnering with non-profit organization, Baby2Baby, to help families in need gain access to the necessary baby gear to keep little ones safe. To start the partnership, Graco donated over $250,000 in product including a variety of car seats, strollers, playards, swings and highchairs to support the children living in poverty Baby2Baby serves. Educational materials on car seat safety and safe sleep will accompany the donation, helping to support Baby2Baby's programs and providing parents with tips and tools to assist in keeping their little ones protected. "We are thrilled to be teaming up with Baby2Baby to offer families access to thousands of baby products," said Laurel Hurd, Segment President, Learning & Development, Newell Brands. "For over 60 years, Graco has been committed to providing parents with thoughtful and safe solutions, and we are happy to bring our innovations to families in need through Baby2Baby's network." In addition to the product donation, Graco will also give $10,000 to support Baby2Baby's Sweet Dreams initiative, which aims to provide every child with a safe place to sleep. Sleep safety is an important issue to the organization, as the cost of safe sleep options is prohibitive for many low-income families, making children living in poverty the most vulnerable.
    [Show full text]
  • Standardized Parent Company Names for TRI Reporting
    Standardized Parent Company Names for TRI Reporting This alphabetized list of TRI Reporting Year (RY) 2011 Parent Company names is provided here as a reference for facilities filing their RY 2012 reports using paper forms. For RY 2012, the Agency is emphasizing the importance of accurate names for Parent Companies. Your facility may or may not have a Parent Company. Also, if you do have a Parent Company, please note that it is not necessarily listed here. Instructions Search for your standardized company name by pressing the CTRL+F keys. If your Parent Company is on this list, please write the name exactly as spelled and abbreviated here in Section 5.1 of the appropriate TRI Reporting Form. If your Parent Company is not on this list, please clearly write out the name of your parent company. In either case, please use ALL CAPITAL letters and DO NOT use periods. Please consult the most recent TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions (http://www.epa.gov/tri/report/index.htm) if you need additional information on reporting for reporting Parent Company names. Find your standardized company name on the alphabetical list below, or search for a name by pressing the CTRL+F keys Standardized Parent Company Names 3A COMPOSITES USA INC 3F CHIMICA AMERICAS INC 3G MERMET CORP 3M CO 5N PLUS INC A & A MANUFACTURING CO INC A & A READY MIX INC A & E CUSTOM TRUCK A & E INC A FINKL & SONS CO A G SIMPSON AUTOMOTIVE INC A KEY 3 CASTING CO A MATRIX METALS CO LLC A O SMITH CORP A RAYMOND TINNERMAN MANUFACTURING INC A SCHULMAN INC A TEICHERT & SON INC A TO Z DRYING
    [Show full text]
  • NEWELL BRANDS INC. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    Table of Contents As Filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 16, 2016 Registration No. 333- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM S-4 REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 NEWELL BRANDS INC. (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) Delaware 3089 36-3514169 (State or Other Jurisdiction of (Primary Standard Industrial (I.R.S. Employer Incorporation or Organization) Classification Code Number) Identification Number) 6655 Peachtree Dunwoody Road Atlanta, Georgia 30328 (770) 418-7000 (Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices) Bradford R. Turner Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary 6655 Peachtree Dunwoody Road Atlanta, Georgia 30328 (770) 418-7000 (Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service) Copies to: Joel T. May Jones Day 1420 Peachtree Street, N.E. Suite 800 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Telephone: (404) 521-3939 Facsimile: (404) 581-8330 Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable following the effective date of this registration statement. If the securities being registered on this form are being offered in connection with the formation of a holding company and there is compliance with General Instruction G, check the following box. ¨ If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨ If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.
    [Show full text]