DHB Industries Class Action Litigation Website
HomeCase DocumentsContact Us

Welcome to the DHB Industries Class Action Litigation Website

This website has been established to provide general information related to the DHB Industries, Inc. (“DHB”) Class Action Litigation. It also summarizes the proceedings and events that have occurred since the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (the “District Court”) initially approved the settlement of the litigation on July 8, 2008 (the “Prior Settlement”). Those proceedings and events include, among other things, DHB’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy and the execution of a supplemental agreement and addendum intended to resolve certain disagreements among parties to the Prior Settlement, including DHB itself (also referred to herein as “Point Blank Solutions,” “Point Blank,” and, with certain related entities, “Debtors”), as well as to make available and facilitate the distribution of certain proceeds of the Prior Settlement.

The deadline to submit a timely claim in the DHB Industries Class Action Litigation Settlement was October 16, 2007.  Late claims and revisions to timely claims are no longer being allowed.

Plaintiffs' counsel in the Class Action is Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP and Labaton Sucharow LLP.  


On November 1, 2019, distribution checks were mailed to eligible claimants in the DHB Class Action, as a result of the Class’s Settlement approved in 2008, its Supplemental Settlement approved in 2015, the Global Settlement Agreement reached with the United States and others in 2018, and the Class’s 2018 petition to the U.S. Department of Justice for remission of assets restrained by the Government (and the resulting remission award) in connection with criminal proceedings against David H. Brooks.  (The various settlements are discussed below.).

Authorized Claimants’ payments were calculated using the claims submitted in the Class Action and the Court-approved Plan of Allocation.  Checks will become void after January 30, 2020 and unclaimed funds will be subject to re-distribution.

If you have changed your address from the address listed on the check you received, or if you require some other change to your check, please email classact@gilardi.com.  If you did not receive a check and you believe you filed an eligible claim, please email classact@gilardi.com.  When contacting the Claims Administrator, please provide as much information as possible, including your Class Action claim number(s) if available, the name and mailing address listed on your Class Action claim(s), and your current mailing address.  If you are requesting a change of the claimant name originally listed on a claim for payment purposes, please also provide supporting documentation for your request. 


The distribution checks mailed on November 1, 2019 only relate only to the Class Action and the remission award by the Government.  Because of David Brooks’ death on October 27, 2016 and the appeal of his then-pending conviction, his conviction was abated, as was the order and judgment relating to criminal restitution. 


The Class Action is a securities fraud litigation that is pending before the Honorable Judge Joanna Seybert. Defendant DHB was a manufacturer and provider of bullet- and projectile-resistant garments, fragmentation protective vests, slash and stab protective armor and related ballistic accessories, they also manufactured and distributed sports medicine, health support and other products.

The Prior Settlement was approved by the District Court on July 8, 2008 . An appeal was taken from the District Court’s approval of the settlement of a related derivative action (the “Derivative Action”), and on September 30, 2010, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded the judgment approving the Derivative Action settlement, which impacted the occurrence of the Effective Date in connection with the Prior Settlement. On April 14, 2010, Point Blank commenced bankruptcy proceedings under chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (the “Bankruptcy Case”). On September 17, 2010, Point Blank moved to reject the Prior Settlement, which motion was granted by the Bankruptcy Court on December 22, 2010. An appeal from that order was taken, but was stayed and remains pending.  

On November 16, 2010, Point Blank filed an action in the Bankruptcy Court against, among others, counsel to the Lead Plaintiffs in the Class Action, seeking a return of the settlement funds that were transferred to escrow (the “Escrowed Funds”) pursuant to the Prior Settlement. Motions to dismiss and related motions were filed in that action and have been denied (and appealed) or stayed. Lead Plaintiffs in the Class Action also filed claims against Point Blank in the bankruptcy proceedings based on the same facts alleged in the Class Action.

In and after October 2007, David Brooks (Point Blank’s former Chief Executive Officer), Sandra Hatfield (Point Blank’s former Chief Operating Officer), and Dawn Schlegel (Point Blank’s former Chief Financial Officer) were indicted for crimes based on, among other things, the same misconduct alleged in the Class Action and/or the Derivative Action. All three were subsequently convicted or pleaded guilty to one or more criminal counts. In connection with the indictment of David Brooks, the Government restrained a significant amount of what it claimed were his assets (the “Restrained Assets”), and additional funds posted as bail (the “Bail Funds”) were subsequently forfeited.

In November 2010 and December 2011, the District Court conducted extensive proceedings in David Brooks’ criminal action (the “Criminal Action”) to determine the amount of traceable assets that David Brooks obtained as a result of his criminal offenses. As a result of those proceedings, the amount of Restrained Assets potentially available for restitution to victims (including claimants in the Class Action and Point Blank itself) was approximately $185.7 million, inclusive of the Bail Funds and approximately $60 million that is the subject of an order of forfeiture. Lead Plaintiffs (on behalf of claimants in the Class Action) and Point Blank asserted competing claims to this money in connection with the Criminal Action to determine appropriate restitution. The Government made recommendations to the District Court regarding its view of the respective amounts claimants in the Class Action, other investor victims, and Point Blank were entitled to, and these recommendations were significantly more favorable to Point Blank than to the claimants in the Class Action. As discussed below, however, the District Court did not issue any decision on the subject of restitution until 2015.

The complex procedural posture of the various proceedings summarized above, including Point Blank’s Bankruptcy Case, prevented the Prior Settlement from becoming effective, and prevented any distribution of the proceeds of the Prior Settlement to claimants in the Class Action. The issue of who was entitled to those proceeds was also the subject of significant litigation.

With the foregoing backdrop, beginning in June 2011, Lead Plaintiffs and the Debtors embarked on negotiations with David Brooks and various other members of the Brooks family to resolve the disputes described above. On December 22, 2011, these parties signed a global settlement term sheet (the “Term Sheet”). Thereafter, the parties commenced the process of seeking approval of the settlement reflected in the Term Sheet from the Government and the District Court, but David Brooks abandoned this settlement in late 2013, before the parties obtained any of the required approvals. 

After David Brooks terminated the Term Sheet, Lead Plaintiffs and the Debtors (including Point Blank), as the victims of David Brooks’ criminal conduct, agreed to continue settlement negotiations among themselves. They reached an agreement, and executed a term sheet on November 25, 2014, followed by a settlement agreement on February 5 and 6, 2015 (the “Supplemental Settlement Agreement”). Several weeks later, on March 27, 2015, the District Court finally ordered restitution in the Criminal Action, awarding $53.9 Million to Point Blank and $37.5 million to the investor victims of David Brooks’s crimes, including members of the Class in the Class Action (the “Restitution Orders”).

On or about May 4, 2015, the Supplemental Settlement Agreement was amended to take into account the impact of the Restitution Orders. An Addendum to the Supplemental Settlement Agreement was then executed on or about June 10, 2015 (the “Addendum”) to resolve an Objection to the Supplemental Settlement submitted by the Official Committee of Equity Security Holders of Point Blank (the “Equity Committee”).  The Equity Committee asserted that objection in connection with the Debtors’ motion seeking the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of the Supplemental Settlement, which was required by the agreement. Thereafter, the Supplemental Settlement, as amended on May 4, 2015 and modified by the Addendum, was approved both by the District Court and the Bankruptcy Court.

On October 27, 2016, David Brooks died, putting his conviction, which was on appeal, and the Restitution Orders into doubt. On September 20, 2017, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision holding, among other things, that David Brooks’s death – occurring while the criminal appeal was pending – resulted in the abatement of the non-tax convictions, the forfeiture order, and the Restitution Orders.  The abatement had the effect of eliminating those additional sources of victim recovery.  Thereafter, to help preserve these assets for investor victims (beyond the Civil Forfeiture Action previously commenced by the Government), on or about January 26, 2017, the SEC re-opened its civil enforcement action originally brought against David Brooks, and now brought against his estate, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (the “SEC Action”).

In the wake of these developments, and with no ultimate resolution in sight, Lead Plaintiffs and the Debtors embarked on negotiations with David Brooks’s estate, various other members of the Brooks family, and the United States Government in an attempt to resolve all of the complex matters described above, including the Class Action, the Derivative Action, the SEC Action, the Civil Forfeiture Action, and all the other related claims and disputes pending among and between the participants in connection with those proceedings and the Bankruptcy Case. The participating parties engaged in an around-the-clock mediation on December 6 and 7, 2017, and reached a global agreement that they documented in a term sheet, subject to later, more formal documentation.

Shortly afterward, as required by the global settlement agreement, Lead Plaintiffs filed a petition for remission on behalf of all Class Members with the Department of Justice on January 5, 2018, for losses suffered by Class Members who invested in DHB. Lead Plaintiffs subsequently filed a supplemental petition on March 1, 2018. Then on July 11, 2018, the Department of Justice notified Lead Plaintiffs by letter that their petition for remission on behalf of the Class had been preliminarily granted up to the amount of $81,540,718.81 for losses suffered by the Class, with the grant of remission contingent upon the entry of a final order of forfeiture for the restrained assets and subject to the conditions set forth in the approval letter.

Approximately four months later, the parties to the December 2017 term sheet signed a formal Global Settlement Agreement, dated as of November 1, 2018, and a Consent Order of Forfeiture. Among other things, the Global Settlement Agreement creates a pool of Forfeited Assets, having an approximate value of $143 million, from which will be deducted a payment of $9.5 million to the Brooks family in settlement of their claims against Point Blank in the Bankruptcy Case, and certain costs and expenses of the United States, not to exceed approximately $2,497,000. The balance is to be used for purposes of remission in accordance with remission awards to the Class and the Debtors made by the Department of Justice on July 11, 2018. The remission payments will be prorated, since there are insufficient funds to pay the remission awards in full, and will be based upon the claims process previously conducted in the Class Action. As a condition imposed by the Government, the remission award is solely for the benefit of Class Members..

In May 2019, the Department of Justice confirmed that the remission award to the Class would be $73,089,224.23, representing approximately 90% of Class Members' recognized losses.  This amount, less only a cost reserve of $71,581 for the claims administrator’s estimated costs to distribute the fund (as approved by the Government), will be awarded to Class Members, on a pro rata basis, who submitted valid, recognized claims in the Class Action on or before January 26, 2018.  The only exceptions are roughly 50 Class Members with tax or other liabilities to the Government, whose awards will be reduced by the amount of their liability to the Government before any remaining award is distributed directly by the Government to those 50 Class Members.

Although the information on this website is intended to assist you, it does not replace the information contained in the Notice Regarding Supplemental Settlement Agreement, the Global Settlement Agreement, and other case documents which are provided on this website. We recommend that you read the Notice and other relevant case documents carefully.