Skip to content Skip to navigation

Stock Losses

Barrick's Veladero Mine

Barrick Gold Corporation is a mining company that explores for gold and develops gold mines. But the complaint claims that pipe ruptures caused temporary suspensions in its Veladera mine in Argentina, and that the company violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by minimizing the latest incident and not lowering its guidance for 2017. Stock losses at the eventual announcement were more than 11%.

Two Aircraft in Flight

United Technologies Corporation has been in existence since 1934. But in 2013 and 2014, changes in the market for aircraft parts began substantially affecting its earnings—a problem the complaint for this class action claims the company did not disclose, in violation of Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Instead, the complaint says, the company issued unrealistic guidance and pressured its business units to meet it, by such practices as “pulling in” sales, or getting customers to order earlier than they otherwise would have, thus taking sales from future periods. 

Atari Therapeutics Logo and Pills

This class action centers around an April 26, 2017 report by Edison Investment Research Ltd. on clinical trials, for an Akari Therapeutics drug, after the report was withdrawn the day after its publication. The complaint alleges that the report contained false information, that the company’s CEO was possibly the one who provided it, and that the company lacked adequate internal controls to prevent this. According to the complaint, the company’s prior public statements violated of Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Snapchat Logo on Screen

The complaint for this class action alleges that Snap’s Registration Statement for its initial public offering (IPO) on March 2-3, 2017 contained false and misleading information about user growth, in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On May 16, 2017 Bloomberg reported that the perso who had been hired to run Snap’s new user growth and engagement team, had filed a lawsuit against Snap, claiming he was fired “for raising questions about allegedly false growth metrics” and alleging that Snap had been “falsely representing its key performance metrics—such as user growth and engagement figures” in order to inflate its value prior to the IPO.

Dick's Sporting Goods Store Interior

Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc. seems to have made a large error in its calculations of figures—or did it in fact not have adequate control over its financial reporting for 2016? On May 12, 2017, Dick’s put out a current report on Form 8-K/A saying that “a computation error resulted in a $23.4 million overstatement of Adjusted EBITDA amounts for both the 13 weeks and 52 weeks ended January 28, 2017.” It later announced that its sales for the first quarter of 2016 had fallen short of forecasts. Both statements caused the company’s stock price to fall. 

Image of Nerve

Alzheimer’s, with its loss of the most basic kinds of mental functioning, is a frightening disease. Unfortunately, the complaint for this class action claims that Neurotrope, Inc. in its public statements in 2017 over-promised for its new drug Bryostatin-1 and its alleged ability to repair brain synapses. Neurotrope spoke of the drug in terms of “a potential breakthrough” or “a new and disruptive technology” and even as a way to reverse rather than simply slow Alzheimer’s. Yet according to the complaint, the company’s Phase 2b trials failed to demonstrate that the drug was even effective.

Eco Science Solutions Logo

According to the complaint for this class action, Eco Science Solutions, Inc. appears to have deserved less trust in its public statements than most. The company announced an intended acquisition in May 2017, claiming to have signed a Letter of Intent with Ga-Du Bank, Inc. A few weeks later, on May 22, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) temporarily stopped trading of the company’s stocks. In part, it stated that it had done so “because of concerns regarding the accuracy and adequacy of publicly disseminated information concerning, among other things, [the company’s] proposed acquisition of Ga-Du Bank, Inc.”

Silverado 2500 HD Truck

It was a sad day for car lovers when Volkswagen, and then other renowned German automakers, were exposed for using emissions defeat devices in their vehicles. Now American automaker General Motors (GM) is accused of doing the same. This securities class action holds the company responsible for concealing its wrongdoing, in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and for stock losses sustained when the news emerged. On May 25, 2017, Bloomberg reported that GM had installed defeat devices in Sierra and Silverado models of heavy-duty trucks. According to the article, the defeat devices allowed the trucks to pass emissions tests in the test temperature range while allowing them to emit two to five times the pollutants permitted at other times. 

Zoompass Logo

The complaint for this class action claims that rises in Zoompass stock prices were caused by a $2 million campaign to unlawfully promote its stock—a “pump-and-dump scheme.” It alleges that the company’s lack of disclosure of this violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On May 25, 2017 Seeking Alpha put out an article that claimed that Zoompass had been involved with promotion, according to the complaint, involving its CEO. The article said that “we have discovered advertisements on Google and Yahoo Finance that direct visitors to a website promoting Zoompass…” that “features a glaring report … that is quick to point our industry statistics and million dollar figures relating to ‘financial technology’ while lacking substance relating to the company’s internal business operations.” 

Container of Perjeta

This securities class action is built around statements about the drugs Herceptin and Perjeta, designed for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer—statements that the complaint claims violate the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The drugs’ maker, Roche, originally put out a statement claiming that the combination of the two drugs produced higher disease-free survival rates than the older Heceptin alone, but subsequent news showed that the improvement was very small, probably not enough to justify a drug that cost roughly $70,000 for a year’s treatment.