Archives: Cases

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. United Microelectronics entered into a conspiracy with Fujian to steal trade secrets from Micron related to the R&D of DRAM. The Company hired former Micron employees specifically to steal research and trade secrets from Micron. These activities put the Company at risk of criminal investigation by the U.S. government. 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 United Microelectronics, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Vanda engaged in a fraudulent off-label usage scheme with its drugs Fanapt and Hetlioz. The Company abused the Medicare, Medicaid, and Tricare programs to receive drug reimbursements from the government. Due to this fraudulent activity, the Company faced legal action by the government. 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 Vanda, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Molson Coors did not take proper steps to reconcile the outside basis deferred income tax liability for the Company’s investment in the MillerCoors, LLC partnership. This resulted in the Company misreporting its net income in its financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2016, and December 31, 2017. Consequently, the net income for these two years was revised downwards. Molson Coors lacked effective internal controls on financial reporting. 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 Molson Coors, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Maiden failed to create and maintain sufficient underwriting processes and risk management controls necessary to set appropriate prices for reinsurance and avoid excessive losses. The Company did not take steps to assess the risk of the portfolio of its largest customer, AmTrust, which is a related party. Maiden did not undertake independent reviews, analyses, and audits of AmTrust, which would have discovered the risk had been understated. 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 Maiden, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. A senior Wirecard executive located in Singapore was accused of backdating contracts and other acts of forgery including falsifying accounts and money laundering, throughout the time period of 2015 to 2018. When the Company hired an external law firm to investigate the Singapore office, it reported “serious offences of forgery and/or of falsification of accounts.” Wirecard denied material weakness in its internal controls and failed to disclose the true weakness of its financial reporting controls to investors. 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 Wirecard, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. General Electric was the target of an SEC investigation into its accounting practices, and the investigation had been expanded. The Company’s Power Charge was one focus of the investigation. At the same time, the Department of Justice opened an investigation into the Company’s accounting practices and the GE Power Charge. 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 General Electric, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Astec suffered from numerous costly problems with its wood pellet plants. These problems stopped the Company’s plants from operating at their promised production levels. The ongoing problems presented a threat to Astec’s business and financial performance. 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 Astec, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Uxin was presumably planning to stop offering complimentary services to customers including inspections. The Company planned on having dealers provide these services to consumers on a complimentary basis. This change was likely to negatively impact Unix’s 2B business model. 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 Uxin, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. The Fund’s Registration Statement did not disclose that due to a low-volatility trading environment, liquidity risks, and systemic design flaws, the Fund was susceptible to suffering calamitous losses. Throughout the class period, the defendants made similar false and materially misleading statements. When the market learned the truth about SVXY, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Tyme failed to design its Phase II Study of its drug candidate SM-88 in a way that could present reliable results on its efficacy for pancreatic cancer. Specifically, the Company failed to include a control group, instead relying on historical control data. Not including a control group in the Phase II trial rendered the study’s results unreliable. 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 Tyme, investors suffered damages.