Eastman Kodak Company

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Kodak failed to disclose that it had granted insiders stocks options worth millions just before the public announcement of a $765 million loan from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation to develop medicines to treat COVID-19, an announcement which the Company knew would immediately increase the value of its shares. Kodak insiders also purchased tens of thousands of shares before the announcement, acting on the news before it went public. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading. When the market learned the truth about Kodak, investors suffered damages.

-->

Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Cabot failed to maintain appropriate environmental controls and also failed to mitigate known problems with controls and procedures. The Company failed to fix malfunctioning gas wells, polluting the water supply of Pennsylvania. The Company downplayed its civil and criminal liability for this and other environmental problems. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Cabot, investors suffered damages.

-->

MEI Pharma, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. MEI Pharma overstated the potential efficacy of its drug Pracinostat as treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (“AML”) in its target population. Pracinostat’s Phase 3 Trial was therefore unlikely to meet its primary endpoint on overall survival. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about MEI Pharma, investors suffered damages.

-->

Sky Solar Holdings, Ltd.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Documents issued in support of Sky’s merger with a group (the “Offeror Group”) were inadequate in multiple ways. The Company’s documents failed to meet disclosure obligations under Rule 13e-3 about transaction fairness and the valuation performed by the Offeror Group. The documents also failed to meet Rule 13e-3 requirements on the availability of appraisal rights or other shareholder rights. The Company claimed there would be no appraisal rights because a short-form merger under Cayman law does not require a shareholder vote. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Sky, investors suffered damages.

-->

Airbus SE

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Airbus failed to maintain appropriate protocols to ensure compliance with anti-corruption laws. The Company engaged in bribery, corruption, and fraud schemes to enhance its business in defense deals and other areas. The Company’s earnings were derived in part from these illegal schemes, and therefore were unsustainable. These schemes were likely to cost the Company billions in settlements and fines and lead to ongoing governmental oversight. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Airbus, investors suffered damages.

-->

Wells Fargo & Company

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Wells Fargo failed to maintain appropriate internal controls over financial reporting. The Company did not maintain compliance with the 2018 regulatory consent orders against it. Remedial plans developed by the Company were insufficient to prevent further consumer abuses. These remedial measures also failed to protect the Company’s customers from consumer fraud. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Wells Fargo, investors suffered damages.

-->

YayYo, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. YayYo founder and former CEO El-Batrawi continued to maintain direct and indirect control over the Company, involving himself in its daily business operations, including assisting the underwriters in marketing the Company’s IPO. El-Batrawi did not sell his 12,525,000 “Private Shares,” maintaining his controlling interest despite NASDAQ’s requirement that he control not more than 10% of the Company per its listing agreement. The Company’s creditors were promised an arrangement in which they would purchase shares as part of YayYo’s IPO which the Company would then repurchase. The Company planned to fund this repurchase scheme with money from the IPO itself. YayYo owed large amounts of money to credits including a social media service provider and its own former President, CEO, and Director. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the IPO period. When the market learned the truth about YayYo, investors suffered damages.

-->

ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. UCO experienced huge market volatility caused by dampened demand for oil due to the coronavirus pandemic and both increased supply and decreased prices caused by the Russia/Saudi oil price war. A massive influx of investor funds heightened a number of problems for the Fund, causing it to approach positional and regulatory limits. Combined with other issues, this meant UCO could no longer pursue its passive investment strategy as represented in the Fund’s Registration Statement. Based on these facts, the Fund’s public statements were false and materially misleading. When the market learned the truth about UCO, investors suffered damages.

-->

Wins Finance Holdings Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Wins’ repayment of its RMB 580 million Guohong Loan suffered from grave uncertainty. If the Company failed to repay the loan, its financial and operating condition would be severely impacted. The Company failed to maintain internal controls on financial reporting despite promising its investors that weaknesses had been rectified. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Wins, investors suffered damages.

-->

Guidewire Software, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Guidewire’s transition to cloud computing was not proceeding successfully. The Company’s cloud-based products lagged behind competitors and required improvement. This ongoing failure also impacted the Company’s traditional business. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Guidewire, investors suffered damages.

-->