|
|
|
Labaton Sucharow LLP Files a Class Action Lawsuit
Securities Class Action |
2011/10/31 08:41
|
Labaton Sucharow LLP filed a class action lawsuit on October 26, 2011 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of purchasers of OmniVision Technologies, Inc. common stock between August 27, 2010 and October 13, 2011, inclusive (the "Class Period").
The action charges OmniVision and certain of its officers with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the Company's financial results were artificially inflated by virtue of the fact that the Company had concealed the loss of its exclusive contract with Apple Inc. ("Apple") to supply imaging sensors for Apple's celebrated iPhone.
OmniVision is a designer and manufacturer of image sensors that are used in digital cameras to convert optical images into electronic signals. OmniVision is one of the leading suppliers of complementary metal-oxide-semiconductors ("CMOS") sensors used in mobile telephones. The Complaint alleges that OmniVision failed to disclose that: (a) it had lost its lucrative, high-profile, and exclusive contract with Apple; (b) competition was eroding its "leadership position" in the smartphone industry; (c) delays in the development of its 8-megapixel product line were threatening its prospects; and (d) it lacked a reasonable basis for its statements about its bright prospects in the smartphone market.
On August 25, 2011, OmniVision announced its results for the fiscal first quarter of 2012 and provided guidance for the fiscal second quarter of 2012 that was well below analyst expectations. The Company also disclosed delays in the production of its new 8-megapixel product line. Based on the Company's disappointing guidance, analysts recognized that OmniVision would not be the exclusive producer of camera components for Apple's new, fifth generation iPhone--the iPhone 4S--set for release in the fall of 2011. As a result of these revelations, OmniVision's stock declined $7.55 per share, or 30.4 percent, to close at $17.27 per share on August 26, 2011 on extraordinary trading volume.
On October 14, 2011, the iPhone 4S became available for sale and for disassembly. Based on a logo stamped on the inside of the camera sensor, experts determined that Sony--and not OmniVision--had supplied the CMOS sensor for the iPhone 4S. In reaction to this news, OmniVision's stock fell $1.65 per share, or 9.3 percent, to close at $15.95 per share on October 14, 2011 on high trading volume.
On October 14, 2011, the iPhone 4S became available for sale and for disassembly. Based on a logo stamped on the inside of the camera sensor, experts determined that Sony--and not OmniVision--had supplied the CMOS sensor for the iPhone 4S. In reaction to this news, OmniVision's stock fell $1.65 per share, or 9.3 percent, to close at $15.95 per share on October 14, 2011 on high trading volume.
If you are a member of this Class you can view a copy of the complaint and join this class action online at http://www.labaton.com/en/cases/Newly-Filed-Cases.cfm.
Labaton Sucharow LLP, with offices in New York, New York and Wilmington, Delaware, is one of the country's premier law firms representing institutional investors in class action and complex securities litigation, as well as consumers and businesses in class actions seeking to recover damages for anticompetitive practices. The Firm has been a champion of investor and consumer rights for more than 45 years, seeking recovery of current losses and necessary governance reforms to protect investors and consumers. Labaton Sucharow has been recognized for its excellence by the courts and its peers. More information about Labaton Sucharow is available at www.labaton.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dyer & Berens LLP Files Class Action Lawsuit
Securities Class Action |
2011/10/26 09:44
|
Dyer & Berens LLP announced that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of AgFeed Industries, Inc. between March 16, 2009 and August 2, 2011, inclusive. AgFeed is engaged in the animal nutrition and commercial hog producing businesses in China and maintains its principal executive offices in Colorado.
What actions may I take at this time?
If you purchased or acquired shares during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff, you must request appointment by the court no later than December 19, 2011. A "lead plaintiff" works with counsel to direct the litigation and participates in important decisions, including the amount of compensation to accept in settlement of the class action. The lead plaintiffs here will be selected from among applicants claiming the largest loss from their investment in the Company during the Class Period.
What are the allegations in the complaint?
The complaint contains allegations that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business. Specifically, the defendants misrepresented and concealed from the investing public that, among other things: (i) AgFeed's formula-based analysis for determining accounts receivable and calculating reserves for doubtful accounts did not take into consideration the individual repayment abilities of its customers; (ii) the Company's accounts receivable were materially overvalued and its allowances for doubtful accounts were significantly under-reserved; and (iii) the Company exaggerated its market edge as the combination of overstated assets and understated expenses resulted in an illusion of heightened profitability and Company value. Based upon the foregoing, the complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
About Dyer & Berens LLP.
The plaintiffs are represented by Dyer & Berens LLP. The firm's extensive experience in securities litigation, particularly in cases brought under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, has contributed to the recovery of hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved investors. For more information about the firm, please visit www.dyerberens.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Securities Class Action |
2011/10/24 10:40
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action Lawsuit
Securities Class Action |
2011/10/22 10:40
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Law Office of Robbins Umeda LLP Announces Class Action
Securities Class Action |
2011/10/11 09:40
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Investment Fraud Litigation |
|
|
|
|
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
|
|
|
| |
| |
| |
|
The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
