December 7, 2015 - The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss with prejudice.
February 13, 2014 - The U.S. Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's dismissal on March 15, 2012.

April 5, 2012 - The lead plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal.

March 15, 2012 - The court dismissed the case with prejudice.

October 14, 2011 - The lead plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint on behalf of investors who purchased BP p l c ordinary shares or American Depositary Receipts between June 30, 2005 and August 4, 2006. The lead plaintiffs allege that the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading statements between June 30, 2005 and August 4, 2006.

February 27, 2009 - The court denies in part and granted in part defendants' motion to dismiss.

July 24, 2008 - Defendants filed a motion to dismiss.

June 19, 2008 - The case was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

June 12, 2008 - Another case was consolidated.

May 12, 2008 - The lead plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint.

April 17, 2008 - Lead plaintiffs and lead counsel were appointed and all cases were consolidated.

February 29, 2008 - Another investor filed a complaint.

January 22, 2008 - Lead plaintiff motion was filed.

November 15, 2007 - An investor in shares of BP p l c (NYSE: BP) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against BP p l c over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws Laws in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between March 31, 2005 and August 4, 2006.

According to the complaint, between March 31, 2005 and August 4, 2006, BP p l c intentionally and/or deliberately recklessly failed to properly and safely maintain BP p l c’s oil pipelines in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. On March 2, 2006, a massive leak releasing more than 200,000 gallons of oil occurred in BP p l c’s Prudhoe Bay oil pipeline. Criminal and civil investigations by federal and state agencies determined that the lead was due to internal corrosion caused by bacteria. BP p l c’s own internal investigation revealed that the use of a “smart pig” – an industry-recognized good practice – could have discovered the internal corrosion. The Department of Transportation issued a Corrective Action Order on March 15, 2006 requiring BP p l c Exploration Alaska to (“BPXA”) to take remedial action, including running a smart pig in the Prudhoe Bay oil pipelines. Defendants assured BP p l c investors that its corrosion monitoring was “aggressive” and “robust.” Despite the severity of the March 2006 oil spill – the worst in the history of North Slope of Alaska – BP p l c persisted with its inadequate maintenance of the Prudhoe Bay pipelines. On August 7, 2006, before the stock market opened, BP p l c announced that BPXA was completely shutting down production in Prudhoe Bay after a second leak and resultant oil spill from another corroded pipeline occurred. A Congressional investigation on April 20, 2007 revealed that extensive cost cutting at BPXA may have contributed significantly to the pipeline corrosion that caused the March 2006 spill. BP pleaded guilty to a criminal violation of the federal Clean Water Action on November 29, 2007 and agreed to pay a $20 million fine in settlement of federal and state criminal violations in connection with the March and August 2006 Prudhoe Bay oil spills. During March 31, 2005 and August 4, 2006, the Defendants had actual knowledge of, or recklessly disregarded, material facts and failed to disclose material information to investors concerning the maintenance and operating condition of the Prudhoe Bay pipeline. As a direct result of the market learning of the Defendants’ wrongdoing, the price of BP p l c shares declined