This Amendment No. 4 (this “Amendment”) amends and supplements the Tender Offer Statement on Schedule TO (together with any amendments and supplements hereto, the “Schedule TO”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 1, 2020 by (i) FR Utility Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Parent”), (ii) FR Utility Services Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent (the “Purchaser”), and (iii) First Reserve Fund XIV, L.P., a Cayman Islands limited partnership, or an affiliate thereof, which is the controlling stockholder of both Parent and the Purchaser. The Schedule TO relates to the tender offer for all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock, par value $0.10 per share (“Shares”), of The Goldfield Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Goldfield”), at a price of $7.00 per Share, net to the seller in cash without interest and less any applicable withholding taxes (the “Offer Price”), upon the terms and conditions set forth in the offer to purchase, dated December 1, 2020 (together with any amendments or supplements thereto, the “Offer to Purchase”), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit (a)(1)(A), and in the related letter of transmittal (together with any amendments or supplements thereto, the “Letter of Transmittal” and, together with the Offer to Purchase, the “Offer”), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit (a)(1)(B).
All the information set forth in the Offer to Purchase and the related Letter of Transmittal, including all schedules thereto, is hereby incorporated by reference herein in response to Items 1 through 9 and Item 11 of this Amendment, except as otherwise set forth below. This Amendment should be read together with the Schedule TO. Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Offer to Purchase of the Schedule TO.
This Amendment is being filed to amend and supplement Item 11 as reflected below.
Item 11. | Additional Information. |
Item 11 of the Schedule TO is hereby amended and supplemented as follows:
The information set forth in Section 16—“Certain Legal Matters; Regulatory Approvals” of the Offer to Purchase is hereby amended and supplemented by replacing the last paragraph with the following three paragraphs:
“On December 11, 2020, George C. Feng and Tom Feng, purported stockholders of Goldfield, filed a lawsuit against Goldfield and the directors of Goldfield in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In the case, captioned George C. Feng and Tom Feng v. The Goldfield Corporation, David P. Bicks, Harvey C. Eads, Jr., John P. Fazzini, Danforth E. Leitner, and Stephen L. Appel, Case No. 1:20-cv-10496, the plaintiffs allege that the Schedule 14D-9 contains materially incomplete and misleading information, including, among other things, with respect to certain financial data and analyses underlying Stifel’s opinion, and that the failure to adequately disclose such material information constitutes a violation of Sections 14(e), 14(d) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The plaintiffs seek, among other things, to enjoin the Transactions or, in the alternative, rescission (or rescissory damages) if the Transactions close.
On December 11, 2020, Kristin Thoden, a purported stockholder of Goldfield, filed a lawsuit against Goldfield and the directors of Goldfield in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. In the case, captioned Kristin Thoden v. The Goldfield Corporation, David P. Bicks, Harvey C. Eads, Jr., John P. Fazzini, Danforth E. Leitner, and Stephen L. Appel, Case No. 1:20-cv-06058, the plaintiff alleges that the Schedule 14D-9 contains materially incomplete and misleading information, including, among other things, with respect to certain financial data and analyses underlying Stifel’s opinion, and that the failure to adequately disclose such material information constitutes a violation of Sections 14(e), 14(d)(4) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The plaintiff seeks, among other things, to enjoin the Transactions or, in the alternative, rescission (or rescissory damages) if the Transactions close.
The outcome of these lawsuits cannot be predicted with certainty; however, Goldfield believes that they are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them. If additional similar complaints are filed, absent new or different allegations that are material, Parent and the Purchaser will not necessarily announce such additional filings.”
2