|
|
|
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2012/03/06 09:37
|
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in United States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of purchasers of Molycorp, Inc. common stock during the period between March 9, 2011 and November 10, 2011.
For more information regarding this class action suit, please contact Ryan & Maniskas, LLP toll-free at (877) 316-3218 or by email at rmaniskas@rmclasslaw.com or visit: www.rmclasslaw.com/cases/mcp.
The complaint alleges that defendants’ false and misleading statements about the capability of the Company’s “Mountain Pass” mining operation and the Company’s earnings caused Molycorp common stock to trade at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts during the Class Period: (a) Molycorp’s development and expansion of the Mountain Pass mine was not progressing on schedule and would not allow the Company to reach rare earth oxide production rates at the end of calendar 2012 and 2013; and (b) end users had been reducing demand for the Company’s products as prices for rare earth elements increased.
On November 10, 2011, the Company reported disappointing third quarter 2011 revenues and earnings results below analysts’ estimates and announced a reduction in Mountain Pass production guidance for the fourth quarter of 2011 due to expected equipment downtime relating to Mountain Pass engineering and expansion issues. The Company’s stock price fell, dropping from $38.70 per share on November 10, 2011 to $33.45 per share on November 11, 2011, or 13.6%, on heavy trading volume.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than April 3, 2012, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Ryan & Maniskas, LLP or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.
www.rmclasslaw.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Inmate cannot change court-appointed lawyer
Court Watch |
2012/03/05 09:13
|
The Supreme Court says a death row inmate can't change his court-appointed appeals lawyer because he didn't like the lawyer's defense tactics.
The justices on Monday turned away the appeal from Kenneth Clair, who was sentenced to death in California in 1987 for burglary and murder.
Clair wanted to change his federal public defender in 2005 because he says they were trying to stop his execution instead of trying to prove his innocence. A federal judge denied his request but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision.
The justices ruled unanimously that the appeals court's decision was incorrect
Justice Elena Kagan wrote that Clair's request came just as a judge was about to make a final ruling so any change would have been too late.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bankruptcy threat to iPad trademark challenger
Court Watch |
2012/03/04 09:13
|
A major creditor of Proview Electronics, which is challenging Apple Inc.'s use of the iPad trademark, has moved to have the ailing computer monitor maker liquidated, reports said Monday.
Taiwan-based Fubon Insurance is seeking $8.68 million in debts and has filed an application to have Proview declared bankrupt, the reports by the Xinhua News Agency and other mainland media said.
Proview's mainland Chinese subsidiary is based in the southern export zone of Shenzhen, where an official at the city's Intermediate Court said he expected an announcement regarding the case soon.
"It's a sensitive case in a sensitive period of time, so we won't comment or release information while we will have an announcement in the near future," said the official who gave only his surname, Zhu.
Proview lawyer Ma Dongxiao said the company believes its financial problems won't affect the handling of a court case in which Apple is appealing a ruling against its claim to the iPad trademark in China.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal court orders May 29 primary date for Texas
Law Center |
2012/03/03 10:19
|
The federal court in San Antonio has ordered Texas to hold its primary elections on May 29, resolving for now one of the biggest issues in the state's redistricting battles.
The three-judge panel issued the election schedule two days after releasing political maps for Texas to use in the 2012 election. Legal disputes over the maps for congressional and House districts have kept Texas from holding elections.
In the primary schedule released Thursday, the filing period for candidates reopens Friday and closes March 9.
While the court order clarifies the election schedule, some minority groups complain that the election maps are unfair and still are seeking changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Court rules against Helm in suit over ad
Breaking Legal News |
2012/03/02 10:19
|
A New York court says Levon Helm long ago signed away rights that let an advertising agency use the song "The Weight" in a cellphone commercial.
The Band's former drummer and singer sued ad agency BBDO Worldwide Inc. in 2004. An appeals court ruled against him Thursday.
Helm sued after the 1968 classic cropped up in an ad for what was then Cingular Wireless. He said he didn't approve that use.
But the appeals court says the recording contract surrounding the song gave a record label permission to license it to the agency.
Helm lawyer John O'Neill says the contract only gave the label permission to promote the music itself. BBDO's lawyer didn't immediately return a call seeking comment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mattel appeals $310M award in Bratz copyright case
Court Watch |
2012/03/02 10:19
|
Mattel Inc. appealed a $310 million award in its eight-year legal fight over Bratz dolls but will no longer pursue its claim that a rival toy maker infringed on its copyright by developing the lucrative line.
In court papers filed with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, attorneys for Mattel said the company disagreed with the jury finding that MGA Entertainment didn't steal the idea for the pouty-lipped, hip hop-inspired dolls but wouldn't challenge it after the grueling legal battle.
"While we continue to believe that the Bratz designs ... were owned by Mattel, we've decided not to appeal that aspect of the verdict, because we do not wish to have another lengthy trial on the Bratz claims," Mattel spokesman Alan Hilowitz said Thursday.
However, El Segundo-based Mattel did ask the appeals court in the papers filed Monday to reverse the financial judgment entered by a judge based on a jury verdict. The award included $172 million in damages for MGA for misappropriation of trade secrets, and $137 million for MGA in attorney fees and defense costs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2012/03/02 10:19
|
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of CNOOC Limited American Depositary Shares between January 27, 2011 and September 16, 2011, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. CNOOC, through its subsidiaries, engages in the exploration, development, production and sale of crude oil, natural gas and other petroleum products. The Company owns oil and natural gas properties in Asia, Oceania, Africa, the Americas and offshore China – including the Penglai 19-3 (“PL19-3”) oilfield situated in northern China’s Bohai Bay.
The Complaint alleges that defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business and financial results, including that: (i) the Company was not in compliance with environmental laws and regulations; (ii) the Company concealed the extent and severity of oil spills that occurred at the PL19-3 oilfield in June 2011; (iii) as news of the oil spills emerged, the Company downplayed its responsibility to effect the cleanup of the oil spills, portrayed itself as being the “non-operator” of the oilfield and, moreover, hindered the cleanup by requiring the operator of the oilfield to use a CNOOC-affiliated company for the cleanup; (iv) the Company improperly accounted for its contingent liabilities in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”); and (v), based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company’s operations and its expected oil production.
No class has yet been certified in the above action. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. If you purchased the ADSs of CNOOC between January 27, 2011 and September 16, 2011, you have certain rights, and have until April 29, 2012 to move for lead plaintiff status. To be a member of the class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent class member.
www.glancylaw.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
