|
|
|
Law Firm Brower Piven Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/10/25 10:34
|
Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation announces that a class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Hewlett-Packard Co. during the period between November 22, 2010 and August 18, 2011, inclusive (the "Class Period”).
If you have suffered a net loss for all transactions in HP common stock during the Class Period, you may obtain additional information about this lawsuit and your ability to become a lead plaintiff by contacting Brower Piven at www.browerpiven.com, by email at hoffman@browerpiven.com, by calling 410/415-6616, or at Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation, 1925 Old Valley Road, Stevenson, Maryland 21153. Attorneys at Brower Piven have combined experience litigating securities and class action cases of over 60 years.
No class has yet been certified in the above action.
Members of the Class will be represented by the lead plaintiff and counsel chosen by the lead plaintiff. If you wish to choose counsel to represent you and the Class, you must apply to be appointed lead plaintiff no later than November 14, 2011 and be selected by the Court. The lead plaintiff will direct the litigation and participate in important decisions including whether to accept a settlement and how much of a settlement to accept for the Class in the action. The lead plaintiff will be selected from among applicants claiming the largest loss from investment in the Company during the Class Period. You are not required to have sold your shares to seek damages or to serve as a Lead Plaintiff.
The complaint accuses the defendants of violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of the Company’s failure to disclose during the Class Period, contrary to its disclosure that webOS was going to play an integral role in the Company’s strategy going forward, including running on HP’s new TouchPad tablet PC as well as on all of the Company’s PCs by 2012, that webOS, the TouchPad and the PC business were not central to HP’s business model and webOS would not be integrated across the Company’s entire product line, that TouchPad hardware was inefficient, limiting the degree of effectiveness of the webOS operating system, and that HP’s business model was not working because the Company was unable to leverage its extensive portfolio and scale of products and services in a strategically beneficial manner.
According to the complaint, after, on August 18, 2011, HP announced disappointing third quarter fiscal 2011 financial results and lowered guidance for fiscal year 2011, and after HP announced several major shifts in its long-term business model, including that it "will discontinue operations for webOS devices, specifically the TouchPad and webOS phones,” the value of HP shares declined significantly.
If you choose to retain counsel, you may retain Brower Piven without financial obligation or cost to you, or you may retain other counsel of your choice. You need take no action at this time to be a member of the class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/10/24 10:34
|
The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of purchasers of the securities of AgFeed Industries, Inc. between March 16, 2009 and August 2, 2011 (the "Class Period").
The Complaint charges that AgFeed and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose the following: (i) AgFeed's collection efforts and credit dealings with its animal nutrition customers were not working because the "formula based analysis" AgFeed relied on in determining accounts receivable and reserves for doubtful accounts was flawed; (ii) allowances for doubtful accounts were undervalued; (iii) accounts were overvalued and bad debts were undervalued, causing reported asset values to be overstated and expenses to be understated; and (iv) as a result, AgFeed exaggerated its market edge creating an illusion of heightened profitability.
On August 2, 2011, AgFeed announced preliminary financial results for the second quarter of 2011 that were well below expectations and that it expected to post a loss of $17 million, as it added $5 million in allowances for its bad debt expenses. Additionally, on August 9, 2011, AgFeed disclosed to the SEC that it would withdraw the Registration Statement for its animal nutrition business.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than December 19, 2011, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class. A lead plaintiff is a class member that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Although your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision whether or not to seek appointment as a lead plaintiff, lead plaintiffs make important decisions which could affect the overall recovery for class members.
While Izard Nobel LLP has not filed a lawsuit against the defendants, to view a copy of the Complaint initiating the class action or for more information about the case, and your rights, visit: www.izardnobel.com/agfeed/, or contact Izard Nobel LLP toll-free: (800)797-5499, or by e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com. For more information about class action cases in general, please visit our website: www.izardnobel.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federman & Sherwood Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/10/22 10:34
|
On October 19, 2011, a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri against K-V Pharmaceutical Company. The complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws, Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, including allegations of issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market which had the effect of artificially inflating the market price, and the manufacture and distribution of unapproved drugs through its two (2) subsidiaries, Ther-Rx and ETHEX. The class period is from February 14, 2011 through April 4, 2011.
Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of the Class. If you are a member of the Class as described above, you may move the Court no later than Monday, December 19, 2011, to serve as a lead plaintiff for the Class. However, in order to do so, you must meet certain legal requirements pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
If you wish to discuss this action, participate in this or any other lawsuit, or have any questions or concerns regarding this notice, or preservation of your rights, please contact:
William B. Federman
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
www.federmanlaw.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ruth's Chris Hit With Class Action Discrimination Suit
Class Action |
2011/10/21 09:30
|
Current and former female employees of Ruth's Chris Steak House have sued the company alleging gender discrimination and seeking class-action status.
Last week's filing came after U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein in Washington, D.C., ruled that a smaller lawsuit alleging gender discrimination against the company could be amended to seek class action status.
The lawsuit had previously been limited to three individual plaintiffs. The class action lawsuit would be on behalf of all female employees at the company's headquarters and restaurants from September 2006 to the present.
The women allege that the restaurant operator conducted a pattern and practice of gender discrimination, including compensating men more than women, subjecting women to sexist comments, and disciplining women more harshly than men.
"The work environment at RCSH is one that is demeaning to women, reflects a culture of male domination and female subjugation, and is a causative factor in the discrimination against women in compensation, promotion, and termination," the lawsuit said. |
|
|
|
|
|
Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/10/20 10:33
|
On October 19, 2011, Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against K-V Pharmaceutical Company and certain of the Company's officers in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The action for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock of K-V between February 14, 2011 and April 4, 2011, inclusive.
If you purchased the common stock of K-V during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in the action, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. Any member of the investor class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of its choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. If you wish to discuss this action or have questions concerning this notice or your rights, please contact Scott+Scott
scottlaw@scott-scott.com
http://www.scott-scott.com/cases/new/securities-fraud-litigation-1533-k-v-pharmaceutical-company-kv-a.html
The complaint filed in the action charges that during the brief Class Period, the Company issued false and misleading statements claiming the Food and Drug Administration had granted K-V the exclusive distribution rights over its "Makena," a drug compound that had previously been prescribed by physicians for decades to prevent miscarriages, and that the agency would enforce those rights by preventing K-V's competitors from distributing generic compounds of Makena. The complaint also alleges that defendants told investors K-V's Makena distribution program was designed to "expand access" to the drug compound, including to low-income and other at-risk groups, while concealing that the $1,500 list price K-V was charging would actually reduce availability of the drug compound to physicians and their patients. As a result, based on a fundamental misperception of K-V's sales and earnings potential, the complaint charges that K-V's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, allowing K-V to sell $200 million worth of senior secured notes, with the proceeds used in large part to pay down the Company's debts.
The complaint alleges that the truth began to come to light on March 17, 2011, when two U.S. Senators publicly questioned the bona fides of K-V's distribution program, stating "the financial assistance is not sufficient and does not extend to certain groups of women," and so that in reality, "KV Pharmaceutical's actions will result in diminished access to appropriate health care for women and result in increased preterm births." It is alleged that this partial disclosure caused K-V's stock price to fall precipitously, removing some of the stock inflation. Then, following the FDA's own March 30, 2011 statement that the agency did "not intend to take enforcement action against" K-V's competitors for distributing the generic version of K-V's Makena, K-V's stock fell further on extremely high trading volume. Finally, following K-V's April 1, 2011 disclosure that K-V was reducing Makena's list price by nearly 55% to $690 per injection -- versus the previous list price of $1,500 -- the market learned on April 4, 2011 that many physicians would never prescribe Makena to their patients due to flaws in the distribution program. On this news, K-V's stock price fell an additional 9.5% in a single trading session.
Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major securities, antitrust and employee retirement plan actions throughout the United States. The firm represents pension funds, foundations, individuals and other entities worldwide. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2011/10/17 09:56
|
The law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP is investigating potential securities law violations as alleged in a securities class action lawsuit filed on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Imperial Holdings, Inc. pursuant and/or traceable to the Company’s initial public offering on or about February 7, 2011 through September 27, 2011, inclusive.
Imperial Holdings shareholders, or individuals with information relating to this investigation, who wish to learn more about the action should click here or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll free at (800) 541-7358.
Background on the Imperial Holdings Securities Class Litigation
The action is brought against Imperial Holdings, certain of its officers and directors, and the underwriters of the IPO for violations of the Securities Act of 1933. Imperial Holdings is a specialty finance company that focuses on providing premium financing for individual life insurance policies.
The action alleges that the Company’s registration statement and prospectus for the IPO, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose that Imperial Holdings had engaged in wrongdoing with respect to its life insurance finance business that would expose the Company and certain of its employees to government investigations.
On September 27, 2011, Imperial Holdings announced that federal investigators had served the Company with a search warrant and that it and certain of its employees, including its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and its President and Chief Operating Officer, were under investigation in connection with the Company’s life insurance business. In response to this announcement and news of the raid on the Company's headquarters, the price of Imperial Holdings stock declined from $6.30 per share to close at $2.19 per share on September 28, 2011, on extremely heavy trading volume.
About Lieff Cabraser
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility. Since 2003, the National Law Journal has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the top plaintiffs’ law firms in the nation. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examined recent verdicts and settlements in addition to overall track records. Lieff Cabraser is one of only two plaintiffs’ law firms in the United States to receive this honor for the last nine consecutive years. For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm’s representation of investors, please visit http://www.lieffcabraser.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Law Office of Robbins Umeda LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2011/10/11 09:41
|
Robbins Umeda LLP announces that the firm commenced a class action lawsuit on October 7, 2011, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased the common stock of Stereotaxis, Inc. between February 28, 2011 and August 9, 2011 against certain of the Company's officers and directors for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Umeda LLP and Carey, Danis & Lowe.
Stereotaxis designs, manufactures, and markets a cardiology instrument control system, called Niobe®, for use in a hospital's interventional surgical suite to enhance the treatment of coronary artery disease and arrhythmias. The Company also markets the Odyssey system as a data management solution for remote viewing and recording of live interventional procedures. The Company's executive offices are located in St. Louis, Missouri.
The complaint alleges that beginning on February 28, 2011, Chief Executive Officer Michael Kaminski, along with certain officers and directors at Stereotaxis, issued a series of positive statements to investors about the business condition and future prospects of the Company that were materially false and misleading, and that caused shares of the Company's stock to trade at artificially high prices.
In particular, the complaint alleges that officials at the Company failed to disclose to investors material adverse facts that: (1) Stereotaxis was unable to leverage its extensive portfolio and scale of products and services in a strategically beneficial manner; (2) market feedback from users of the Company's technology was "mixed"; (3) the Niobe system was far from the "standard of care" and needed "fundamental product improvements"; (4) demand for the Niobe and Odyssey systems was weak, and that the number of units being sold was decreasing; (5) the reported backlog of orders did not fairly represent future revenue the Company expected to recognize; and that (6) the Company overstated its market edge.
On August 8, 2011, the Company announced financial results for the second quarter of 2011 that revealed that the Company was performing well below expectations. Additionally, the press release disclosed to investors that the Company was forced to suspend its full year guidance for 2011, and that Daniel Johnston was resigning as the Chief Financial Officer. On this news shares of Stereotaxis declined by more than 58% of their value, closing on August 9, 2011 at just $1.19 per share.
If you purchased Stereotaxis stock during the Class Period and wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from October 10, 2011. To discuss your shareholder rights, please contact attorney Gregory E. Del Gaizo at 800-350-6003 or via the shareholder information form.
Robbins Umeda LLP represents individual and institutional shareholders in derivative, direct, and class action lawsuits. The law firm's skilled litigation teams include former federal prosecutors, former defense counsel from top multinational corporate law firms, and career shareholder rights attorneys. Robbins Umeda LLP has helped its clients realize more than $1 billion of value for themselves and the companies in which they have invested. For more information, please go to http://www.robbinsumeda.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
|
|