Securities & Investment Fraud

Mohawk Industries, Inc., Securities Class Litigation

Securities Header Image

Introduction

Class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Mohawk Industries, Inc. (“Mohawk” or the “Company”) (NYSE: MHK).  If you purchased or otherwise acquired Mohawk common stock between April 28, 2017 and July 25, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than March 3, 2020.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.  Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market.  We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

Mohawk investors who wish to learn more about the litigation and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should click here or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at 1-800-541-7358.

Background on the Mohawk Industries, Inc., Securities Class Litigation

Mohawk, incorporated and headquartered in Calhoun, Georgia, is a global manufacturer of flooring products, including ceramic and porcelain tile and natural stone products, carpets, rugs, laminate, hardwood flooring, sheet vinyl, and luxury vinyl tile, or LVT.

The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that Mohawk engaged in a scheme to inflate its revenues and earnings by stuffing the channel with its conventional flooring products and booking fictitious sales of those products. Defendants made false and misleading statements about Mohawk’s sales growth and the demand for its conventional flooring products. Defendants also reassured investors about Mohawk’s increasing accounts receivable and inventory levels by falsely attributing those increases to market factors including rising raw material costs and inflation.

The truth about Defendants’ fraudulent scheme was revealed beginning on July 25, 2018, when the Company reported disappointing financial results well below its previous guidance and Wall Street estimates. The Company also announced that it would be reducing production, which indicated that its sales channels were stuffed with more product than it was able to sell. Following this news, Mohawk’s stock price declined $38.06 per share, or 17%, from its closing price on July 25, 2018 to close at $179.31 on July 26, 2018.

On October 25, 2018, Mohawk reported its financial results for the third quarter of 2018 that was well below analysts’ estimates.  Mohawk executives attributed the disappointing results, in part, to further manufacturing reductions that were required to control inventory buildup. On this news, the Company’s stock price fell $36.03 per share, or 23.9%, from its closing price on October 25, 2018 to close at $115.03 per share on October 26, 2018.

On July 26, 2019, Mohawk reported that it was again reducing production to control inventory levels so that supply matched customer demand. Following this news, the price of Mohawk stock fell nearly 18% to close at $128.84 on July 26, 2019.

Shareholder Contact Form


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

II. TRANSACTIONS IN MOHAWK COMMON STOCK

Number of shares of Mohawk stock held immediately before the start of Class Period on April 28, 2017:

From April 28, 2017 and July 25, 2019, inclusive, I made the following transactions in Mohawk common stock:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

During the 90 days after July 25, 2019, I made the following transactions in Mohawk common stock:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years.  In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.”  Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting our firm’s “laser focus” and noting that our firm routinely finds itself “facing off against some of the largest and strongest defense law firms in the world.”  In late 2016, Benchmark Litigation named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

Exelon Corporation Securities Class Litigation

Stock chart

Introduction

Class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Exelon Corporation (“Exelon” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: EXC). If you purchased or otherwise acquired Exelon securities between February 9, 2019 and November 1, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than February 14, 2020.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action. Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market. We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

Exelon investors who wish to learn more about the litigation and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should use the form below or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at 1-800-541-7358.

Background on the Exelon Securities Class Litigation

Exelon, incorporated in Pennsylvania and headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, is a utility services holding company that serves as the parent company of the Commonwealth Edison Company (“ComEd”), the largest electric utility in Illinois, and the sole electric provider in Chicago.

The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Exelon and/or its employees were engaged in unlawful lobbying activities; (2) this conduct increased the risk of a criminal investigation into Exelon; (3) ComEd’s revenues were partly the product of unlawful conduct and therefore unsustainable; and (4) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On July 15, 2019, Exelon disclosed that it had received a grand jury document subpoena from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois (“USAO”) concerning Exelon’s “lobbying activities in the State of Illinois.” On this news, the price of Exelon stock price fell $0.18 per share, or 0.37% from a previous closing price of $49.06 on July 12, 2019, to close at $48.88 per share on July 15, 2019.

On October 9, 2019, Exelon disclosed that the USAO sought records of communications with Illinois State Senator Martin Sandoval, chairman of the Illinois Senate Transportation Committee. Exelon also revealed that it had formed a Special Overnight Committee in June 2019 to oversee compliance with the subpoenas.

On October 15, 2019, shortly before market close, Exelon announced the departure of Chief Executive Officer Anne Pramaggiore, “effective immediately.” On this news, Exelon’s stock price dropped $2.15 per share, or 4.57% from a closing price of $47.06 on October 15, 2019, to close at $44.91 per share on October 16, 2019, on elevated trading volume.

On October 31, 2019, Exelon revealed that on October 22, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission had notified the Company that it had opened an investigation into Exelon’s lobbying activities. On this news, the price of Exelon dropped $1.17 per share, or 2.51% from a previous closing price of $46.66 on October 30, 2019, to close at $45.49 per share on October 31, 2019.

The next day, on November 1, 2019, the Chicago Tribune reported that “a source with knowledge of the case in Chicago” confirmed that “Pramaggiore is one focus of the ongoing federal investigation.” According to the same article, “the ComEd lobbying investigation dates to at least mid-May, when the FBI executed search warrants at the homes of former lobbyist Mike McClain of Quincy, a longtime confidant of House Speaker Michael Madigan, and of former 23rd Ward Ald. Michael Zalewski.” Additionally, “the information sought by the FBI included records of communications among Madigan, McClain and Zalewski about attempts to obtain ComEd lobbying work for Zalewski.” On this news, the price of Exelon stock declined an additional $0.15, or 0.33% from the previous day’s close, to close at $45.34 per share on November 1, 2019.

Shareholder Contact Form


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

II. TRANSACTIONS IN EXELON SECURITIES

Number of shares of Exelon securities held immediately before the start of Class Period on February 9, 2019:

From February 9, 2019 through November 1, 2019, inclusive, I made the following transactions in Exelon securities:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

During the 90 days after November 1, 2019, I made the following transactions in Under Armour shares:

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.”

HEXO Corp. Securities Class Litigation

Securities Header Image

Introduction

Class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of HEXO Corp. (“HEXO” or the “Company”) (NYSE: HEXO).  If you purchased or otherwise acquired HEXO common stock between January 25, 2019 and November 15, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than January 27, 2020.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.  Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market.  We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

HEXO investors who wish to learn more about the litigation and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should click here or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at 1-800-541-7358.

Background on the HEXO Securities Class Litigation

HEXO, incorporated and headquartered in Canada, makes and sells cannabis products for distribution to users, principally through third-party physical and online retailers.

Based on our investigation, we believe HEXO made materially false or misleading statements by (1) providing revenue guidance that materially overstated HEXO’s likely revenue for 2020, (2) overstating the number of retail locations for HEXO’s product that would be available during the fiscal year of 2019, (3) overstating the value of inventory, and (4) failing to disclose the Company’s unlicensed growth of cannabis in Niagara.

After the close of markets on October 4, 2019, HEXO announced the sudden resignation of its new Chief Financial Officer.  In response, HEXO’s stock price declined 6% to close at $3.80 on October 7, 2019, the next trading day.

Six days later on October 10, 2019, HEXO withdrew its revenue guidance for the fiscal year of 2020 based in part on slow expansion of retail locations in Quebec and Ontario.  That day, HEXO’s stock price closed at $3.66, or 22% lower than the prior day’s closing price.

On October 28, 2019 HEXO announced that it would take an impairment charge as a result of an excess of inventory that was caused in part by the slow expansion of retail locations in Quebec and Ontario.  HEXO’s stock declined another 6% to close at $2.52 the next day.

Then on November 15, 2019, HEXO belatedly disclosed that it had identified the unlicensed growth of cannabis on a HEXO property on July 30, 2019.  That day, HEXO’s stock closed at $1.79, a 5% decline from the prior day’s closing price.

Shareholder Contact Form


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

II. TRANSACTIONS IN HEXO SECURITIES

Number of shares of HEXO common stock held immediately before the start of Class Period on January 23, 2019:

From January 24, 2019 through November 15, 2019, inclusive, I made the following transactions in HEXO common stock:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

During the 90 days after November 15, 2019, I made the following transactions in HEXO securities:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years.  In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.”  Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting our firm’s “laser focus” and noting that our firm routinely finds itself “facing off against some of the largest and strongest defense law firms in the world.”  In late 2016, Benchmark Litigation named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

Baxter International Inc. Securities Class Litigation

Securities Class Litigation

Introduction

Class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Baxter International Inc. (“Baxter” or the “Company”) (NYSE: BAX).  If you purchased or otherwise acquired Baxter securities between February 21, 2019 and October 23, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than January 24, 2020.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.  Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market.  We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

Baxter investors who wish to learn more about the litigation and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should use the contact form below or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at 1-800-541-7358.

Background on the Baxter Securities Class Litigation

Baxter, based in Deerfield, Illinois, provides a broad portfolio of essential healthcare products, including acute chronic dialysis therapies, sterile intravenous (IV) solutions, infusion systems and devices, parenteral nutrition therapies, inhaled anesthetics, generic injectable pharmaceuticals, and surgical hemostat and sealant products.

The action alleges that during the Class Period, Baxter and certain of its officers made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) certain intra-Company transactions, undertaken for the purpose of generating foreign exchange gains and losses, used foreign exchange rate conventions that were not in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) and enabled intra-Company transactions to be undertaken after the related exchange rates were already known; 2) the Company lacked effective internal control over its financial reporting; (3) as a result, the Company’s financial statements were misstated and would likely necessitate correction or amendment; (4) due to the Company’s internal investigation, Baxter would not be able to timely file its quarterly report for the period ending September 30, 2019 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on Form 10-Q in a timely manner; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, Baxter and its officers’ statements about the Company’s business and operations lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

On October 24, 2019, Baxter announced that it “recently began an investigation into certain intra-Company transactions undertaken for the purpose of generating foreign exchange gains or losses,” and that according to the Company, “[t]hese transactions used a foreign exchange rate convention historically applied by the Company that was not in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and enabled intra-Company transactions to be undertaken after the related exchange rates were already known.”  The Company also admitted that these intra-Company transactions had “resulted in certain misstatements in the Company’s previously reported non-operating income related to net foreign exchange gains” and acknowledged that upon completion of its investigation, “the Company expects to either amend its periodic reports previously filed with the SEC to include restated financial statements that correct those misstatements, or include in reports for future periods restated comparative financial statements that correct those misstatements.”  Following this news, the price of Baxter common stock fell $8.87 per share, or 10.1%, from a close of $87.95 per share on October 23, 2019 to close at $79.08 per share on October 24, 2019, on elevated trading volume.

Shareholder Contact Form


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

II. TRANSACTIONS IN BAXTER SECURITIES

Number of shares of Baxter common stock held immediately before the start of Class Period on February 21, 2019:

From February 21, 2019 through October 23, 2019 inclusive, I made the following transactions in Baxter securities:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

During the 90 days after October 23, 2019, I made the following transactions in Baxter securities:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years.  In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.”  Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting our firm’s “laser focus” and noting that our firm routinely finds itself “facing off against some of the largest and strongest defense law firms in the world.”  In late 2016, Benchmark Litigation named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

Plantronics, Inc. Securities Class Litigation

Securities Fraud Litigation

Introduction

Securities fraud class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Plantronics, Inc. (“Plantronics” or the “Company”) (NYSE: PLT).  If you purchased or otherwise acquired Plantronics securities between January 2, 2018 and November 5, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than January 13, 2020.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.  Recognized by The National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market.  We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

Plantronics investors may choose to have Lieff Cabraser review their claim by completing the contact form below.  You can also call Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser at 1-800-541-7358 to discuss the litigation.

Background on the Plantronics Securities Class Litigation

Plantronics, incorporated in Delaware and headquartered in Santa Cruz, California, designs, manufactures, and markets integrated communications and collaboration solutions.

Plaintiffs allege that, throughout the Class Period, Plantronics made materially false or misleading statements, failing to disclose that (1) the Company had engaged in channel stuffing to artificially increase its sales; (2) the Company’s internal controls over inventory levels were not effective; and (3) the Company had not adequately monitored inventory levels leading up to multiple product launches.

On November 5, 2019, Plantronics disclosed a $65 million reduction in channel inventory “by reducing sales to channel partners” and significantly lowered its fiscal 2020 guidance.  The same day, Plantronics announced that the Executive Vice President of Global Sales, Jeff Loebbaka, was departing the Company.  On that news, the price of Plantronics common stock fell $14.44 per share, or 36.61%, from a closing price of $39.44 on November 5, 2019, to close at $25.00 per share on November 6, 2019, on extremely elevated trading volume.

Shareholder Contact Form


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

II. TRANSACTIONS IN PLANTRONICS SECURITIES

Number of shares of Plantronics held immediately before the start of Class Period on January 1, 2018:

From January 2, 2018 through November 5, 2019, inclusive, I made the following transactions in Plantronics stock:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

During the 90 days after November 5, 2019, I made the following transactions in Plantronics stock:

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years.  In compiling the list, The National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.”  Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting our firm’s “laser focus” and noting that our firm routinely finds itself “facing off against some of the largest and strongest defense law firms in the world.”  In late 2016, Benchmark Litigation named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

The Chemours Company Securities Class Litigation

Securities and Financial Fraud

Introduction

Securities fraud class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of The Chemours Company Inc. (“Chemours” or the “Company”) (NYSE: CC).  If you purchased or otherwise acquired Chemours common stock from February 16, 2017 through August 1, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than December 9, 2019.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.  Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market.  We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

Chemours investors may choose to have Lieff Cabraser review their claim by completing the contact form below.  You can also call Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser at 1-800-541-7358 to discuss the litigation

Background on the Chemours Securities Class Litigation

Chemours, incorporated and headquartered in Wilmington, Delaware, is a spin-off of the E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (“DuPont”) and produces a wide range of industrial and specialty chemicals products for various markets.  Chemours’s stock began trading as publicly traded company in 2015. The spin-off was completed pursuant to a Separation Agreement that required Chemours to indemnify DuPont for historic environmental liabilities, including those related to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (“PFAS”), toxic chemicals that have since become the basis for environment regulatory actions, governmental prosecutions, personal injury lawsuits, and extensive remediation and other clean-up efforts.

The complaint alleges that Chemours misled investors by misrepresenting that it had correctly accounted and accumulated reserves for its environmental liabilities, that the likelihood of costs exceeding accrued amounts was “remote,” and that, in any event, added costs would not be material.  Chemours also guaranteed investors that its “policies, standards and procedures are properly designed to avoid unreasonable risk of harm to people and the environment,” and that its “handling, manufacture, use and disposal of hazardous substances are in accordance with applicable environmental laws and regulations.” As a result of these misrepresentations, Chemours shares traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period.

On June 28, 2019, the Delaware Chancery Court unsealed a complaint that Chemours had filed against Dupont alleging that its spin-off from DuPont was part a deliberate plan by DuPont to rid itself of significant exposures incurred through decades of PFAS discharge and to unload that responsibility onto Chemours.  Following this news, the price of Chemours’s stock price fell $2.37 per share, or nearly 10%, from its closing price of $24.90 per share on June 27, 2019 to close at $22.53 per share on July 1, 2019.  On August 1, 2019, after the market closed, Chemours announced lower guidance for 2019.  On the following day, it filed its second quarter of 2019 Form 10-Q and revealed that its estimated liabilities were far greater than it had previously represented.  On this news, Chemours’s stock price declined another 19% to close at $14.69 per share on August 2, 2019 on unusually high volume eliminating over $560 million in shareholder value.

Shareholder Contact Form


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

II. TRANSACTIONS IN CHEMOURS SECURITIES

Number of shares of Chemours common stock held immediately before the start of Class Period on February 16, 2017:

From February 16, 2017 through August 1, 2019 inclusive, I made the following transactions in Chemours common stock:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

During the 90 days after August 1, 2019, I made the following transactions in Chemours common stock:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.” Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting our firm’s “laser focus” and noting that our firm routinely finds itself “facing off against some of the largest and strongest defense law firms in the world.” In late 2016, Benchmark Litigation named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

Myriad Genetics Inc., Securities Class Litigation

Stock price chart

Introduction

Securities fraud class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Myriad Genetics Inc., (“Myriad” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: MYGN). If you purchased or otherwise acquired Myriad securities from September 2, 2016 through August 13, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than November 26, 2019.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action. Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market. We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

Myriad investors may choose to have Lieff Cabraser review their claim by completing the contact form below. You can also call Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser at 1-800-541-7358 to discuss the litigation.

Background on the Myriad Securities Class Litigation

Myriad, incorporated and headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, is a molecular diagnostic company that develops and markets predictive, personalized, and prognostic medicine tests. Myriad offers, among other products, GeneSight, a DNA genotyping test to aid psychotropic drug selection for depressed patients, and Foresight, a test for future parents to assess their risk of passing on a recessive genetic condition to their offspring.

The action alleges that during the Class Period, Myriad misrepresented and failed to disclose that: (1) GeneSight lacked sufficient evidence or information to support the tests in their current form and their purported benefits; (2) the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) had requested that Myriad make changes to GeneSight and questioned the validity of the test’s purported benefits; (3) the Company had been in discussions with the FDA regarding the changes to GeneSight that the agency requested; and (4) Myriad’s acquisition of Counsyl, Inc. and its product Foresight had caused the Company to risk receiving lower reimbursement for its expanded carrier screening tests, which could potentially, and did in fact result in a material negative impact on Myriad’s revenue.

On August 13, 2019, Myriad revealed that the FDA requested changes to the GeneSight test offering and that the Company has “been in ongoing discussions with the FDA regarding its request.” In addition, Myriad disclosed that the FDA had questioned whether the validity of GeneSight’s purported benefits had been established and that the agency had increasingly questioned the claims of marketed genetics tests such as GeneSight since at least late 2018. On this news, the price of Myriad common stock fell $19.05 per share, or 42.76%, from a closing price of on $44.55 on August 13, 2019, to close at $25.50 per share on August 14, 2019, on extremely heavy trading volume.

Shareholder Contact Form


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

II. TRANSACTIONS IN MYRIAD SECURITIES

Number of shares of Myriad held immediately before the start of Class Period on September 2, 2016:

From September 2, 2016 through August 13, 2019, inclusive, I made the following transactions in Myriad shares:

PURCHASES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

During the 90 days after August 13, 2019, I made the following transactions in Myriad shares:

SALES

Date
No. of Shares
Price

show more rows

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.” Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting our firm’s “laser focus” and noting that our firm routinely finds itself “facing off against some of the largest and strongest defense law firms in the world.” In late 2016, Benchmark Litigation named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

Wells Fargo & Company Shareholder Derivative Litigation

Securities and Financial Fraud

Lieff Cabraser serves as Co-Lead Counsel for the Fire and Police Pension Association of Colorado, which along with the City of Birmingham Retirement and Relief System, are court-appointed Co-Lead Plaintiffs in this consolidated shareholder derivative action.  Co-Lead Plaintiffs allege that, since at least 2011, the Board and executive management of Wells Fargo & Company (“Wells Fargo”) knew or consciously disregarded that Wells Fargo employees were illicitly creating millions of deposit and credit card accounts for their customers, without those customers’ consent, in an attempt to drive up “cross-selling,” i.e., selling complementary Wells Fargo banking products to prospective or existing customers.

Revelations regarding the scheme, and the defendants’ knowledge or blatant disregard of it, have deeply damaged Wells Fargo’s reputation and cost it millions of dollars in regulatory fines and lost business. In May 2017, the court largely denied defendants’ motion to dismiss Co-Lead Plaintiffs’ amended complaint.  In October 2017, the court again denied a second round of motions to dismiss the amended complaint.

A proposed $320 million settlement (the “Settlement”) has been reached in this derivative action.  On February 28, 2019, Co-Lead Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the Settlement. The benefits to Wells Fargo of the proposed Settlement include (i) monetary consideration of $240 million paid to Wells Fargo by the defendants’ insurers; (ii) agreement and acknowledgement that facts alleged in the derivative action were a significant factor in causing certain corporate governance changes undertaken by Wells Fargo, which include improvement to Wells Fargo’s internal controls, internal reporting, and expanded and enhanced oversight of risk management by the Board of Directors (the “Corporate Governance Reforms”); and (iii) agreement and acknowledgement that facts alleged in the derivative action were a significant factor in causing certain remedial steps with respect to compensation reductions and forfeitures undertaken by Wells Fargo (the “Clawbacks”).  As part of the Settlement, the parties agreed that the Corporate Governance Reforms and the Clawbacks have a value to Wells Fargo of $80 million, for a total Settlement value to Wells Fargo of $320 million.

On May 14, 2019, the court preliminarily approved the proposed Settlement.  The proposed Settlement is subject to final court approval, and a final fairness hearing will be held on August 1, 2019, at 2:00 p.m., before the Honorable Jon S. Tigar, United States District Judge, at the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102.  For more information on the Wells Fargo Derivative Settlement, please visit www.wellsfargoderivativesettlement.com.

The case is In re Wells Fargo & Company Shareholder Derivative Litigation, No. 3:16-cv-05541 (N.D. Cal.).

Important Documents Related to the Case

Notice

Settlement Agreement

Preliminary Approval

Final Approval

Key Case Filings

 

BofI Holding, Inc. Securities Class Litigation

Stock price chart

Lieff Cabraser serves as lead counsel for court-appointed lead plaintiff, Houston Municipal Employees Pension System (“HMEPS”), in this securities fraud class action against BofI Holding, Inc. and certain of its senior officers. The action charges defendants with issuing materially false and misleading statements and failing to disclose material adverse facts about BofI’s business, operations, and performance.

In September 2016, the court largely denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in November 2016 in order to remedy the few claims that had been dismissed. In May 2017, the court denied in significant part defendants’ motion to dismiss that complaint.

The case is Houston Municipal Employees Pension System v. BofI Holding, Inc., et al., No. 3:15-cv-02324 (S.D. Cal.). A copy of the consolidated amended complaint is available here.

If you would like more information about the litigation, or have information relevant to the lawsuit, please use the form below or contact Richard Texier of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at 1-800-541-7358 or at rtexier@lchb.com.

Contact us


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

Telephone Eve

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Comments & questions:

We produce a free e-mail Civil Justice Newsletter three to four times a year, and distribute it to persons who have contacted us and wish to receive the newsletter.

Please sign me up for the Lieff Cabraser Civil Justice Newsletter:



About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for fourteen years. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.” Best Lawyers and U.S. News named Lieff Cabraser as a “Law Firm of the Year” for 2016, and Benchmark Litigation included our firm in its 2016 “Top 10 Plaintiffs Firms” listing.

Petrobras Securities Litigation

Stock price chart

Janus Overseas Fund, et al. v. Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. – Petrobras, et al., No. 1:15-cv-10086-JSR (S.D.N.Y.); Dodge & Cox Global Stock Fund, et al. v. Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. – Petrobras, et al., No. 1:15-cv-10111-JSR (S.D.N.Y.).

Lieff Cabraser represented several funds managed by Janus and several funds managed by Dodge & Cox in individual securities cases arising from the massive fraud at Petrobras, a state-run semi-public energy and oil-production company headquartered in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Plaintiffs sought recovery under the federal securities laws for damages they suffered on transactions in Petrobras securities during the period December 29, 2010 through July 28, 2015 (the “Relevant Period”), due to a pervasive and long-running scheme of bribery and corruption at Petrobras.

Plaintiffs alleged that beginning around 2005 and continuing through the Relevant Period, the Company engaged in a scheme whereby contractors paid bribes to Petrobras executives and others in exchange for the award of lucrative oil and gas construction contracts. Some of the bribes were passed on to Brazilian politicians and political parties. The Company then paid the contractors inflated amounts under the contracts in order to repay them for the bribes. When the fraud was finally revealed beginning in May 2014, it sent shockwaves through the Brazilian government and economy, and caused Petrobras’s market capitalization to plummet. Authorities estimate the scheme has diverted up to, or more than, $28 billion from the Company’s coffers.

Lieff Cabraser’s cases were part of consolidated proceedings before Judge Jed S. Rakoff in the Southern District of New York. The parties reached settlements in the cases in October of 2016.

Flotek Industries, Inc. Securities Class Litigation

Stock price chart

Introduction

Securities fraud class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors in Flotek Industries, Inc. (“Flotek” or the “Company”) (NYSE: FTK). If you purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Flotek between October 23, 2014 and November 19, 2015, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than January 11, 2016.

You may retain Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the actions. Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms, Lieff Cabraser is committed to safeguarding the rights of investors and upholding the integrity of the market. We have significant experience and a successful track record of representing institutional and individual investors in securities and financial fraud litigation.

Flotek investors may choose to have Lieff Cabraser review their claim by completing the contact form below. You can also call Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser at 1-800-541-7358 to discuss the litigation.

Background on the Flotek Class Litigation

Flotek is a global diversified, technology-driven company that develops and supplies oilfield products, services and equipment to the oil, gas and mining industries, and other products that are sold in consumer and industrial markets.

The actions allege that, throughout the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements to investors and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Flotek’s proprietary software application FracMax had data and process errors; (2) the reported production data from FracMax for three of the wells in the Company’s New York City Investor Presentation on September 11, 2015 were inaccurate; and (3) an application from the Company claiming to be FracMax available in the Apple iTunes Store does not work.

On November 9, 2015, the firm Bronte Capital published a report on Flotek asserting, among other things, that: (1) the production data of four proximate wells in Texas set forth in Flotek’s September 11, 2015 presentation to investors did not match the data of the Texas Railroad Commission; and (2) a version of FracMax available in the Apple iTunes Store does not work. On this news, the price of Flotek shares fell $3.50 per share, or 19.34%, from its closing price on November 6, 2015 to close at $14.60 per share on the next trading day, November 9, 2015, on extremely heavy trading volume.

On November 10, 2015, the Company issued a press release acknowledging data and process errors in its FracMax database and the understatement of production data in Company’s presentation on September 11, 2015. On this news, the price of Flotek shares fell $5.56 per share, or 38.1%, from its closing price on November 9, 2015, to close at $9.04 per share on November 10, 2015, on extremely heavy trading volume.

About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation’s top plaintiffs’ law firms for thirteen years. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms “representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs’ bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity.” Best Lawyers and U.S. News have named Lieff Cabraser as a “Law Firm of the Year” for each year the publications have given this award to law firms.

National Century Financial Enterprises Financial Fraud

Stock price chart

Result: Settlements valued at over 70% of client’s $89 million in losses
Year: 2011

In re National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc. Investment Fraud Litigation

Lieff Cabraser attorneys Steven E. Fineman and Michael J. Miarmi served as outside counsel for the New York City Employees’ Retirement System, Teachers’ Retirement System for the City of New York, New York City Police Pension Fund, and New York City Fire Department Pension Fund in this multidistrict litigation arising from fraud in connection with NCFE’s issuance of notes backed by healthcare receivables.

The New York City Pension Funds suffered approximately $89 million in losses resulting from the massive NCFE fraud. Having successfully resolved their claims against numerous parties, the Funds maintain claims against several NCFE founders. To date, the Funds have recovered approximately 70% of their losses, primarily through settlements achieved on their behalf by Lieff Cabraser.

Qwest Communications International Direct Securities Fraud Litigation

Stock price chart

Result: Recoveries for clients in direct action were 13 times what they would have received in class case
Year: 2007

In re Qwest Communications International, Inc. Securities Fraud and “ERISA” Litigation (No. II)

Lieff Cabraser represented the New York State Common Retirement Fund, Fire and Police Pension Association of Colorado, Denver Employees’ Retirement Plan, San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System, and over thirty BlackRock managed mutual funds in individual securities fraud actions (“opt out” cases) against Qwest Communications International, Inc., Philip F. Anschutz, former co-chairman of the Qwest board of directors, and other senior executives at Qwest.

In each action, the plaintiffs charged defendants with massively overstating Qwest’s publicly-reported growth, revenues, earnings, and earnings per share from 1999 through 2002. The cases were filed in the wake of a $400 million settlement of a securities fraud class action against Qwest that was announced in early 2006.

The cases brought by Lieff Cabraser’s clients settled in October 2007 for recoveries totaling more than $85 million, or more than 13 times what the clients would have received had they remained in the class.

Alex Brown Management Services Securities Fraud Lawsuits

Stock price chart

Result: Confidential settlement
Year: 2006

Albert, et al. v. Alex. Brown Management Services, Inc., et al.; Baker, et al. v. Alex. Brown Management Services, Inc., et al. Securities Fraud Litigation

In May 2004, on behalf of investors in two investment funds controlled, managed and operated by Deutsche Bank and advised by DC Investment Partners, Lieff Cabraser filed lawsuits for alleged fraudulent conduct that resulted in an aggregate loss of hundreds of millions of dollars.

The suits named as defendants Deutsche Bank and its subsidiaries Alex Brown Management Services and Deutsche Bank Securities, members of the funds’ management committee, as well as DC Investments Partners and two of its principals. Among the plaintiff-investors were 70 high net worth individuals. In the fall of 2006, the cases settled by confidential agreement.

Bank of America Merrill Lynch Merger Securities Cases

Stock price chart

Result: Confidential settlement
Year: 2013

In two cases — DiNapoli, et al. v. Bank of America Corp., No. 10 CV 5563 (S.D.N.Y.) and Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund, et al. v. Bank of America Corp., et al., No. 11-cv- 07779 PKC (S.D.N.Y.) — Lieff Cabraser sought recovery on a direct, non-class basis for losses that a number of public pension funds and mutual funds incurred as a result of Bank of America’s alleged misrepresentations and concealment of material facts in connection with its acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.

Lieff Cabraser represented the New York State Common Retirement Fund, the New York State Teachers’ Retirement System, the Public Employees’ Retirement Association of Colorado, and fourteen mutual funds managed by Charles Schwab Investment Management. Both cases settled in 2013 on confidential terms favorable for our clients.

AOL Time Warner Alaska Attorney General Securities Fraud Class Action

Stock price chart

Result: Clients recovered 50 times what they would have received in a class case
Year: 2006

Alaska State Department of Revenue, et al. v. America Online, Inc., et al. Securities Fraud Litigation

In December 2006, a $50 million settlement was reached in a securities fraud action brought by the Alaska State Department of Revenue, Alaska State Pension Investment Board and Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation against defendants America Online, Inc. (“AOL”), Time Warner Inc. (formerly known as AOL Time Warner (“AOLTW”)), and Historic TW Inc. When the action was filed, the Alaska Attorney General estimated total losses at $70 million.

The recovery on behalf of Alaska was approximately 50 times what the state would have received as a member of the class in the federal securities class action settlement. The lawsuit, filed in 2004 in Alaska State Court, alleged that defendants misrepresented advertising revenues and growth of AOL and AOLTW along with the number of AOL subscribers, which artificially inflated the stock price of AOL and AOLTW to the detriment of Alaska State funds.

The Alaska Department of Law retained Lieff Cabraser to lead the litigation efforts under its direction. “We appreciate the diligence and expertise of our counsel in achieving an outstanding resolution of the case,” said Mark Morones, spokesperson for the Department of Law, following the announcement of the settlement.

Brooks Automation, Inc.

Stock price chart

Result: $7.75 million settlement
Year: 2008

In re Brooks Automation, Inc. Securities Fraud Litigation

Lieff Cabraser served as Court-Appointed Lead Counsel for lead plaintiff the Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association and co-plaintiff the Sacramento County Employees’ Retirement System in a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of Brooks Automation securities.

Plaintiffs charged that Brooks Automation and its senior corporate officers and directors violated federal securities laws by backdating company stock options over a six year period, and failed to disclose the scheme in publicly filed financial statements. Subsequent to Lieff Cabraser’s filing of a consolidated amended complaint in this action, both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the United States Department of Justice filed complaints against the Company’s former C.E.O., Robert Therrien, related to the same alleged practices.

In October 2008, the Court approved a $7.75 million settlement of the action.

FundAmerica

Stock price chart

Result: $13 million settlement
Year: 1990

Nguyen v. FundAmerica Securities Fraud Litigation

Lieff Cabraser served as Plaintiffs’ Class Counsel in this securities/RICO/tort action seeking an injunction against alleged unfair “pyramid” marketing practices and compensation to participants.

The District Court certified a nationwide class for injunctive relief and damages on a mandatory basis and enjoined fraudulent overseas transfers of assets. The Bankruptcy Court permitted class proof of claims. Lieff Cabraser obtained dual District Court and Bankruptcy Court approval of settlements distributing over $13 million in FundAmerica assets to class members.

Network Associates

Stock price chart

Result: $30 million settlement
Year: 2001

In re Network Associates, Inc. Securities Fraud Litigation

Following a competitive bidding process, the Court appointed Lieff Cabraser as Lead Counsel for the Lead Plaintiff and the class of investors. The complaint alleged that Network Associates improperly accounted for acquisitions in order to inflate its stock price. In May 2001, the Court granted approval to a $30 million settlement.

In reviewing the Network Associates settlement, U.S. District Court Judge William H. Alsup observed,

[T]he class was well served at a good price by excellent counsel … We have class counsel who’s one of the most foremost law firms in the country in both securities law and class actions. And they have a very excellent reputation for the conduct of these kinds of cases and their experience and views…

Media Vision

Stock price chart

Result: $31 million settlement
Year: 2003

In re Media Vision Technology Securities Fraud Litigation

Lieff Cabraser served as Co-Lead Counsel in a class action lawsuit which alleged that certain Media Vision officers, outside directors, accountants, and underwriters engaged in a fraudulent scheme to inflate the company’s earnings, and issued false and misleading public statements about the company’s finances, earnings and profits.

By 1998, the Court had approved several partial settlements with many of Media Vision’s officers and directors, accountants and underwriters which totaled $31 million. The settlement proceeds have been distributed to eligible class members. The evidence that Lieff Cabraser developed in the civil case led prosecutors to commence an investigation and ultimately file criminal charges against Media Vision’s former Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer.

The civil action against Media Vision’s CEO and CFO was stayed pending the criminal proceedings against them. In the criminal proceedings, the CEO pled guilty on several counts, and the CFO was convicted at trial. In October, 2003, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment and entered a judgment in favor of the class against these two defendants in the amount of $188 million.