Today's Date: Add To Favorites   
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Announces Class Action
Securities Class Action | 2011/06/07 11:42

The law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP announces that class action lawsuits have been brought on behalf of all purchasers of the securities of Longtop Financial Technologies Limited (“Longtop” or the “Company”) (NYSE:LFT - News) on the New York Stock Exchange between October 25, 2007 and May 17, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”).

If you purchased Longtop securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than July 22, 2011. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Your share of any recovery in the actions will not be affected by your decision of whether to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. You may retain Lieff Cabraser, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the litigation.

Longtop shareholders who wish to learn more about the actions and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff may visit Lieff Cabraser’s website at http://www.lieffcabraser.com/securities-investor-fraud/case/473/longtop-financial-technologies-limited-securities-class-litigation or contact Sharon Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll free at (800) 541-7358.

Background on the Longtop Securities Class Litigation

The actions are brought against Longtop and certain of its officers and directors for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Longtop, headquartered in Beijing, China, designs, develops, and delivers software solutions and information technology services to the financial services industry in China.

The actions allege that during the Class Period, defendants misrepresented and omitted material information regarding Longtop’s financial condition and prospects. On April 26, 2011, Citron Research issued a report raising serious issues with Longtop’s reported financial results, accounting practices, and operations. In response to the report, the price of Longtop’s shares fell significantly, closing at $17.73 per share on April 27, 2011.

Following the publication of the Citron Research report, Longtop hosted a conference call with investors and analysts during which its senior management denied the allegations in the report. On May 9, 2011, Citron published a second report entitled “Longtop Financial (NYSE:LFT - News) Final Proof of Undisclosed Related Party Transactions.” In response to the report, the price of Longtop shares fell another $1.67 per share, or 8.3 percent, to close at $18.54 on May 9, 2011.

On May 17, 2011, NYSE Regulation, Inc. halted trading in Longtop shares pending an announcement by the Company. Two days later, on May 19, 2011, Longtop issued a press release stating that it would not announce its fourth quarter and fiscal year 2011 results on May 23, 2011 as previously scheduled.

On May 23, 2011, Longtop issued a press release announcing that its independent auditor, Deloitte Touch Tohmatsu CPA Ltd. (“DTT”), and its Chief Financial Officer, defendant Derek Palaschuk, had resigned. According to the release, Deloitte stated in its resignation letter that it was resigning “as the result of, among other things: (1) the recently identified falsity of the Company's financial records in relation to cash at bank and loan balances (and possibly in sales revenue); (2) the deliberate interference by certain members of Longtop management in DTT's audit process; and (3) the unlawful detention of DTT's audit files. DTT further stated that DTT was no longer able to rely on management's representations in relation to prior period financial reports, that continued reliance should no longer be placed on DTT's audit reports on the previous financial statements, and DTT declined to be associated with any of the Company's financial communications in 2010 and 2011.” In addition, Longtop revealed that the Securities and Exchange Commission had commenced an investigation regarding related matters.

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 eight consecutive years.

For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm’s representation of investors, please visit http://www.lieffcabraser.com.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.



RIM Says Investor Suit Is 'Without Merit'
Securities Class Action | 2011/05/30 13:40
Research In Motion Ltd., maker of the BlackBerry smartphone, said Friday that allegations that the company misled investors about its financial state are "without merit."

Lawyers for shareholders of the company filed a lawsuit this week in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking class action status. The suit claims that between Dec. 16, 2010 and April 28 RIM executives made false and misleading statements about the company's financial condition and business prospects. The suit, which was filed by Mary T. Stabile on behalf of anyone who bought the stock during that time frame, names RIM itself, Chief Financial Officer Brian Bidulka, and co-CEOs Jim Balsillie and Michael Lazaridis as defendants.

The suit is the latest in a string of negatives for RIM. The company's BlackBerry smartphones are known for their security and reliability as email devices, but haven't kept up with Apple Inc.'s iPhones or phones that use Google Inc.'s Android software when it comes to running third-party applications. In addition to its sales struggles, the company released its first tablet, the BlackBerry PlayBook, to mixed reviews in April and had to recall about 1,000 of the devices in May due to defective operating software that could have made it impossible for users to set up the device. Most of the gadgets were recalled before being purchased by consumers.

The suit alleges that RIM "failed to inform investors that its aging product line and inability to introduce new products to the market was negatively impacting the company's business and margins." It also argues that RIM knew that BlackBerry shipments would decline and inventory would rise because of problems such as product delays and "lackluster" launches.

RIM's stock dropped 11 percent on March 25 after the company issued a lower-than-expected forecast for its fiscal first quarter. And On April 28 the stock dropped 14 percent when RIM slashed that quarterly forecast, saying it had been selling fewer and cheaper smartphones than it anticipated. Between Dec. 16 and April 29, the stock fell 17.8 percent overall.



Scott+Scott LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Securities Class Action | 2011/02/25 09:12

Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against Oilsands Quest Inc. ("Oilsands Quest" or the "Company") (AMEX:BQI) and certain of the Company's officers in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The action for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock and other publicly-traded securities of Oilsands Quest between August 14, 2006 and July 14, 2009, inclusive (the "Class Period"), including Oilsands Quest's "Exchangeable Shares" offered as consideration for the minority interest in OQI Sask on August 14, 2006; Oilsands Quest's "units" first publicly offered on December 5, 2007 at $5.00 per unit; Oilsands Quest common stock shares publicly offered on December 5, 2007 on a flow-through basis at $6.11 ($6.17 CDN) per share; and Oilsands Quest's "units" first publicly offered on May 1, 2009 at $0.85 per unit.

If you purchased Oilsands Quest common stock or other Oilsands Quest securities 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 (800) 404-7770, (860) 537-5537 or visit the Scott+Scott website, http://www.scott-scott.com for more information. There is no cost or fee to you.

The complaint filed in the action charges that, during the Class Period, Oilsands Quest and certain of its officers and directors overstated the value of the Company's assets by more than $136 million in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Practices ("GAAP").

As alleged in the complaint, on August 14, 2006, Oilsands Quest acquired the minority interest in its operating subsidiary, OQI Sask, that the Company did not already own. The Complaint alleges that Oilsands Quest's Class Period financial reports and statements issued thereafter were false and misleading in that: (a) defendants failed to properly account for Oilsands Quest's acquisition of the minority interest of OQI Sask in August 2006, materially overstating the value of OQI Sask throughout the Class Period; (b) Oilsands Quest's financial statements overstated the value of the Company's interest in OQI Sask and were presented in violation of GAAP throughout the Class Period; and (c) contrary to defendants' Class Period assurances, the Company's internal controls were inadequate to prevent it from improperly inflating the value of its assets.



Dyer & Berens LLP Announces Class Action
Securities Class Action | 2010/12/16 06:33

The law firm of Dyer & Berens LLP (www.DyerBerens.com) announced today that a class action securities fraud lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of China Education Alliance (NYSE: CEU) common stock during the period between March 31, 2009 and November 29, 2010 (the "Class Period").

If you wish to serve as a lead plaintiff, you must seek such an appointment with the court no later than January 31, 2011. A "lead plaintiff" directs the litigation and participates in important decisions including whether to accept a settlement offer and how much of a settlement to accept for the class in the action. The lead plaintiff here will be selected from among applicants claiming the largest loss from investment in the company during the Class Period. Any member of the putative class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

If you wish to discuss the action, the lead plaintiff process, or have any questions concerning your rights or interests in the litigation, please contact Jeffrey A. Berens, Esq. at (888) 300-3362 x302, (303) 861-1764, or via email at jeff@dyerberens.com.

The complaint charges China Education Alliance and certain of its current and former officers with violations of the federal securities laws. Specifically, it is alleged that defendants knew or recklessly disregarded that the company improperly reported $24.9 million in revenue in its 2008 annual report, contradicting a report that the company's main operating subsidiary filed with the Chinese authorities, which revealed less than $1 million in revenue. On November 29, 2010, Kerrisdale Capital published a 30-page report citing evidence that China Education Alliance overstated its revenue and profit and called the company "mostly a hoax." On this news, shares of China Education Alliance common stock fell more than 30%.

Dyer & Berens LLP has significant expertise in prosecuting investor class actions. 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 go to www.DyerBerens.com.

Contact:

Jeffrey A. Berens
Dyer & Berens LLP
303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80203
Tel: (888) 300-3362 x302 or (303) 861-1764
Email: Email Contact
Website: www.DyerBerens.com



Milberg LLP Announces the Filing of a Securities Fraud Class Action
Securities Class Action | 2010/12/15 23:33
A class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of RINO International Corporation (" RINO | PowerRating") (PINKSHEETS: RINO) from July 13, 2009 to November 12, 2010, inclusive ("Class Period").
The complaint alleges RINO and certain of its officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that RINO, a Chinese manufacturer of environmental protection equipment, fraudulently reported inflated revenues to the SEC that were, for 2009, more than 90% higher than revenues reported to Chinese regulators.

On November 10, 2010, a research firm reported that RINO executives allegedly engaged in a wide range of wrongful conduct, including inflating the Company's reported sales revenues and fabricating customer contracts.

In response to this news, the price of RINO's common stock fell $2.34 per share, or more than 15%, to close at $13.18 per share on November 11, 2010.

If you purchased RINO common stock during the Class Period you may, no later than January 14, 2011, file a motion with the Court to appoint you lead plaintiff. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that directs the litigation, and will be the movant that the Court determines to have the largest financial interest in the litigation with claims typical of those of other class members and the ability to adequately represent the class.

Your share in any recovery will not be enhanced by serving as a lead plaintiff. You do not need to be a lead plaintiff to recover in a class action; you can recover as an absent class member. You may retain Milberg LLP, or other attorneys, for this action, but do not need to retain counsel to recover as an absent class member. The complaint in this action was not filed by Milberg.

Founded in 1965, Milberg has offices in New York, Los Angeles, Tampa, and Detroit. The Firm has litigated landmark cases and recovered billions for shareholders and consumers. Our website (www.milberg.com) has additional information.


[PREV] [1] ..[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25].. [26] [NEXT]
All
Securities Class Action
Headline Legal News
Stock Market News
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Securities Lawyers
Securities Law Firm
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Legal Focuses
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Law Firm News
Investment Fraud Litigation
Supreme Court sides with the..
Ex-UK lawmaker charged with ..
Hungary welcomes Netanyahu a..
US immigration officials loo..
Appeals court rules Trump ca..
Trump asks supreme court to ..
Turkish court orders key Erd..
Under threat from Trump, Col..
Japan’s trade minister fail..
Supreme Court makes it harde..
Trump signs order designatin..
US strikes a deal with Ukrai..
Defense secretary defends Pe..
Musk gives all federal worke..
Elon Musk has called for the..
Elon Musk dodges DOGE scruti..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Lane County, OR DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
Post-Divorce Issues Attorney
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
   Legal Resource Links
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