Archives: Cases

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period. National Beverage made sales claims and touted “proprietary techniques” that were not verifiable. The Company’s Chairman and CEO, Nick A. Caporella, also engaged in a pattern of sexual misconduct between 2014 and 2016. Due to these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about National Beverage, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period. Gogo’s antenna product had reliability issues beyond what was disclosed to the public. The antennas required costly rework and replacement and also suffered manufacturing and software problems. As a result, Gogo could not meet its 2018 guidance. According to the lawsuit, the Company’s financial statements were false and misleading throughout the class period.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period. Sibanye’s corporate culture prioritized short-term profits over the safety of its facilities and employees. As a result, about half of all mining fatalities in the country of South Africa in 2018 have occurred in Sibanye mines. The Company’s statements on its operations and business were materially false and misleading throughout the class period due to these facts. When the market learned the truth about Sibanye, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the IPO period. Restoration Robotics issued materially misleading offer materials, resulting in an artificial inflation of the Company’s stock price. As true information on Restoration Robotics entered the market, the Company’s shares dropped by more than 50% from the IPO price of $7.00 per share.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period. PolarityTE failed to disclose the status of Patent #14/954,335 at the time it was acquired by PolarityTE on April 7, 2017 and in the following months. The Company didn’t disclose the updated status of the patent after its final rejection by the U.S. Patent Trademark Office on June 4, 2018. Based on these facts, the Company’s public comments and financial statements were materially false and misleading. When the market learned the truth about PolarityTE, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period. Flex Pharma was overly optimistic regarding the approval chance and viability of FLX-787, its potential product for the treatment of ALS and CMT. This resulted in the Company making materially false and misleading public statements. When the market learned the true details about Flex Pharma, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period. Unum was facing a higher incidence of claims in its long-term care business than it had historically. The Company also experienced unfavorable policy terminations in that business. Unum’s loss ratio in long-term care approached the upper 90% range. This resulted in the Company making materially false and misleading public statements. According to the lawsuit, when accurate information about Unum became apparent in the market, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. China Zenix’s trading actions in relation to the NYSE Continued Listing Requirements went against its public policy. The Company had inadequate controls over financial reporting. Based on these facts, the Company’s public comments were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about China Zenix, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. FAT Brands’ overall sales growth had declined considerably. In particular, sales growth at Bonanza and Ponderosa restaurants were quite slower than what FAT Brands expected when it acquired the brands in early 2017. The fast-casual dining concept favored by the Company was facing saturation as well as pressure to keep customers from going to lower cost restaurants. At the same time, FAT Brands’ free cash flow was lower than the $5 million dividend obligations the Company faced. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading at the time of the IPO. When the market learned the truth about FAT Brands, investors suffered damages.

According to the Complaint, Molina made false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period. The Company failed to disclose that its administrative systems and internal infrastructure were not capable of handling its growth plans. It also failed to mitigate infrastructure flaws that caused critical errors in areas such as provider payments. As a result of these problems, Molina reported an earnings miss for the quarter ending March 31, 2016, also lowering its full-year 2016 guidance. Molina withdrew its 2017 earnings projection on August 2, 2017, the same day it reported a $230 million net loss for the quarter ending June 30, 2017. At the same time, the Company announced it would exit the ACA Health Exchange Marketplace. When the market learned the true details about Molina, investors suffered damages.