Skip to content Skip to navigation

Securities Frauds

This federal securities class action lawsuit is brought against Extreme Networks, Inc., a company which develops and sells network infrastructure equipment and offers related services contracts for extended warranty and maintenance.  The allegations in the complaint evidence that Extreme’s management released false material statements regarding: (1) Extreme’s integration with Enterasys being complete; (2) Lenovo’s acquisition of IBM’s server being complete; (3) The above integration and acquisition promising to drive double-digit revenue growth by fiscal year 2015.  The above statements artificially inflated Extreme’s stock price inducing the Plaintiffs to purchase its securities.

This federal securities fraud class action lawsuit is brought against Nobilis Health Corp., a company acquiring and managing ambulatory surgery centers and healthcare facilities, for making false and misleading material statements, including the following: (a) Nobilis claimed success rates for its AccuraScope procedure, which lacked recognition from any university, medical body, or insurance company; (b) Nobilis overstated its 2014 revenues by over $36 million and its 2014 revenue growth rate as 161%, when it was actually only 44%. These statements caused Nobilis’s stock to trade at artificially inflated prices which caused financial loss to the Plaintiffs.

This securities fraud class action lawsuit is brought against Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. for making false material statements: (a) deceived the investing public regarding Valeant’s prospects and business; (b) omitted disclosure of key aspects of the Valeant’s business, specifically its relationship with a network of specialty pharmacies utilized to boost sales of Valeant’s high-priced drugs; (c) Valeant’s undisclosed use of specialty pharmacies left it subject to increased regulatory risks that investors were unable to account for; (d) without use of specialty pharmacies, Valeant’s financial performance and financial guidance would have been negatively impacted.

Amicus Therapeutics Logo

This securities class action alleges that Amicus Therapeutics made false, misleading and material representations to the market regarding a meeting held with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regarding the development of the company's new drug, migalasta.

China Cache Logo

This class action lawsuit alleges ChinaCache made false statements and failing to disclose that (1) the platform migration to High Performance Cloud Cache (HPCC) was not successful.

This class action lawsuit is brought against USA Technologies alleging failure to disclose (1) significant deficiencies in both the design and operating effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting; and (2) as a result of these deficiencies, USA Technologies’ procedures failed to identify a large number of uncollectible small balance accounts.

This securities fraud class action alleges that Globus, a medical device company, failed to disclose (1) its relationship with a significant distributor was deteriorating; (2) the deterioration negatively impacted Globus’s financial performance; and (3) as a result, Globus’s prospects and statements were false and misleading.

This securities class action alleges that FSC, an asset portfolio company, and FSAM, its asset manager and investment advisor, fraudulently and artificially inflated FSC's assets and investment income in order to increase FSAM's revenue and, later, sell FSC's shares in a subsequent initial public offering at a higher price to investors.

This lawsuit alleges that Volkswagen AG made materially false and misleading statements and omissions to investors concerning company operations, financial condition and outlook and specifically failed to disclose that it had utilized a "defeat device" in certain diesel cars which allowed the vehicles to temporarily reduce emissions during testing yet emit at dramatically higher levels outside of testing conditions.

     This is a securities fraud class action brought against LSB Industries, Inc. alleging that LSB failed to disclose that LSB’s costs related to the expansion of the El Dorado Facility would be significantly higher than reported, which made LSB’s statements about its business operations and prospects false and misleading.

Pages