Securities & Investment Fraud

First Energy Corp. Securities Class Litigation

Stock chart

Introduction

Securities class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors in the common stock of FirstEnergy Corp. (“FirstEnergy” or the “Company”) (NYSE: FE).  If you purchased the common stock of FirstEnergy between February 21, 2017 and July 21, 2020, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than September 28, 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.

First Energy 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 FirstEnergy Securities Class Litigation

FirstEnergy, headquartered in Akron, Ohio, is an electric utility company.  The action alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding FirstEnergy’s internal controls, business practices and prospects.  In particular, defendants boasted of FirstEnergy’s legislative “solutions” to difficulties with its nuclear facilities, but failed to disclose that those “solutions” revolved around an illicit campaign to influence state lawmakers to support legislation favoring the Company.  For nearly three years, FirstEnergy and its affiliates channeled more than $60 million to state politicians and lobbyists, including Ohio Speaker Larry Householder, to ensure the passage of Ohio House Bill 6 (“HB 6”), which provided a $1.3 billion ratepayer-funded bailout of FirstEnergy’s failing nuclear facilities.  Defendants also falsely stated that they were in compliance with state and federal laws and regulations throughout the Class Period, when in reality they were exposing the Company and its investors to undisclosed risks of legal, financial, and reputational damage.

On July 21, 2020, federal agents announced the arrest of Speaker Householder and four other persons, including a lobbyist for FirstEnergy, in connection with a $60 million racketeering and bribery scheme.  The criminal complaint and affidavit described an alleged pay-to-play scheme in which FirstEnergy influenced the legislative process in order to guarantee the passage of HB 6, including by defending the bill against a citizens ballot initiative to overturn the bill.  Prosecutors described the case as the “largest bribery, money-laundering scheme” in Ohio history.  On this news, the price of FirstEnergy stock fell $7.01 per share, or almost 17%, from its closing price of $41.26 on July 20, 2020, to close at $34.25 on July 21, 2020, on heavy trading volume.

On July 22, 2020, Cleveland.com published an article providing additional details regarding the Company’s illicit actions in connection with the scheme.  On this news, the price of FirstEnergy stock dropped an additional $7.16, or 20.9% from its closing price of $34.25 per share on July 21, 2020, to close at $27.09 on July 22, 2020, 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 FISRTENERGY COMMON STOCK

Number of shares of FirstEnergy stock held immediately before the start of Class Period on February 21, 2017:

From February 21, 2017 through July 21, 2020, inclusive, I made the following transactions in FirstEnergy 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 21, 2020, I made the following transactions in FirstEnergy 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.” Benchmark Litigation has named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

Goldman Sachs Shareholder Derivative Litigation

Securities Header Image

Lieff Cabraser represents the Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi and the Sergeants Benevolent Association Annuity Fund, shareholders of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (“Goldman Sachs”), in a document and records request pursuant to Section 220 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (“s.220 request”). The s.220 request is part of an ongoing investigation into Goldman Sachs’s involvement in arranging $6.5 billion in bond offerings on behalf of a Malaysian government-owned investment fund, 1Malaysia Development Bhd. (“1MDB”), that earned Goldman Sachs nearly $600 million in fees.

The company’s involvement in these bond offerings was allegedly at the center of a wide-ranging fraud and money-laundering scheme in which at least $2.7 billion in proceeds from the offerings was misappropriated to pay bribes and kickbacks to foreign officials, ensuring Goldman Sachs continued to benefit from its business with 1MDB, and personally enriching the individuals involved.

Bank of New York Mellon ADRs

securities fraud header image

Normand, et al. v. Bank of New York Mellon Corp., No. 1:16-cv-00212-LAK-JLC (S.D.N.Y.)

Lieff Cabraser, together with co-counsel, represented a proposed class of holders of American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”) (negotiable U.S. securities representing ownership of publicly traded shares in a non-U.S. corporation), for which BNY Mellon served as the depositary bank. Plaintiffs alleged that under the contractual agreements underlying the ADRs, BNY Mellon was responsible for “promptly” converting cash distributions (such as dividends) received for ADRs into U.S. dollars for the benefit of ADR holders, and was required to act without bad faith.

Plaintiffs alleged that, instead, when doing the ADR cash conversions, BNY Mellon used the range of exchange rates available during the trading session in a manner that was unfavorable for ADR holders, and in doing so, improperly skimmed profits from distributions owed and payable to the class.

In 2019, the court granted final approval of a $72.5 million settlement of the action.

Danske Bank A/S Securities Class Litigation

Securities Header Image

Lieff Cabraser, together with co-counsel, represents a large coalition of institutional investors, including state and government pension and treasury systems, in litigation pending in Denmark against Danske Bank A/S (“Danske”). The litigation arises from Danske’s failure to disclose that its reported financial performance was inflated by illegal sources of income and that it was subject to significant risks as a result of such business activities. The litigation is ongoing.

Steinhoff International Holdings N.V. Securities Class Litigation

generic securities header

Lieff Cabraser, together with co-counsel, is currently funding a vehicle for investor recovery against Steinhoff International Holdings N.V. (“Steinhoff”), a Dutch corporation based in South Africa that sells retail brands of furniture and household goods throughout the world.  The vehicle, called the Stichting Steinhoff Investors Losses Foundation, is a Dutch legal entity governed by an independent board of directors.  It seeks recovery of investor losses caused by the massive, multi-year accounting fraud at Steinhoff that has wiped out billions of dollars in shareholder value.  The litigation is ongoing.

The Boeing Company Shareholder Derivative Litigation

generic securities page header image

Lieff Cabraser represents the New York State Common Retirement Fund, and the Fire and Police Pension Association of Colorado, shareholders of The Boeing Company (“Boeing”), in a document and records request pursuant to Section 220 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (“s.220 request”).  The s.220 request is part of an ongoing investigation into Boeing’s development of the 737 MAX airplane, and its response to two 737 MAX airplane crashes in October 2018 and March 2019 as well as into Boeing’s current and former directors and officers for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties in failing to adequately oversee safety of the 737 MAX airplane.

Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. Securities Class Litigation

securities fraud header image

Lieff Cabraser represents certain funds and accounts of BlackRock  in this individual action against Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. (“Valeant”) and certain of Valeant’s senior officers and directors for violations of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and state law arising from defendants’ scheme to generate revenues through massive price increases for Valeant-branded drugs while concealing from investors the truth regarding the company’s business operations, financial results, and other material facts. In September 2018, the court denied defendants’ partial motions to dismiss, and plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The parties are currently engaged in discovery.

Perrigo Company plc Securities Class Litigation

Securities Header Image

Lieff Cabraser represents certain funds and accounts of BlackRock in an individual securities fraud action against Perrigo Company plc (“Perrigo”) and certain of Perrigo’s former senior executives for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The action charges defendants with misrepresenting and failing to disclose to investors that Perrigo was engaged in a generic drugs price-fixing scheme, that Perrigo was insulated from pricing pressures in the generic pharmaceuticals industry, and that Perrigo had successfully integrated Omega Pharma NV, the company’s largest acquisition.

Grand Canyon Education, Inc. Securities Class Litigation

Stock price chart

Introduction

Securities class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors in the publicly traded common stock of Grand Canyon Education, Inc. (“Grand Canyon” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: LOPE). If you purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded common stock of Grand Canyon between January 5, 2018 and January 27, 2020, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than July 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.

Grand Canyon 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 Grand Canyon Securities Class Litigation

Grand Canyon, headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, is an education services company. The action alleges that Grand Canyon made misrepresentations and omissions concerning the spin-off of the Company’s education assets into Grand Canyon University (“GCU”).  Defendants allegedly inflated the Company’s financial results by treating GCU as an off-balance sheet entity into which Grand Canyon stuffed with its own expenses and costs to increase Grand Canyon’s reported profits. The Company repeatedly misled investors by characterizing GCU as a proper “non-profit” and “independent” institution and misrepresenting Grand Canyon’s role as a third-party provider of education services to GCU.

On September 9, 2019, Citron Research published a report examining Grand Canyon’s financials and finding that the Company “is stuffing GCU with expenses to inflate its own profitability and as a result bankrupting GCU.” On this news, the price of Grand Canyon stock fell $4.85 per share, or 4.2%, from its closing price of $114.47 on September 9, 2019 to close at $109.62 the next day.

On November 6, 2019, after market close, Grand Canyon disclosed that it had received a letter from the U.S. Department of Education (“DOE”) denying the Company’s application to designate GCU as a non-profit entity. DOE’s denial was based on its findings that GCU was Grand Canyon’s “captive client” and GCU “is not the entity actually operating [GCU].” On this news, the price of Grand Canyon stock declined $3.80 per share, or 4.13%, from its closing price of $91.88 on November 6, 2019, to close at $88.08 on November 7, 2019.

On January 28, 2020, Citron Research released a second report containing additional details about the DOE’s findings and referenced hundreds of pages of documentation GCE had submitted to DOE that Citron obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. The report called Grand Canyon the “educational Enron,” and concluded that Grand Canyon used a “captive non-reporting subsidiary” in order to “dump expenses and liabilities, while receiving a disproportionate amount of revenue at inflated margins in order to artificially inflate the stock price.” On this news, the price of Grand Canyon stock fell $7.43 per share, or 8.12%, from its closing price of $91.50 on January 27, 2020, to close at $84.07 on January 28, 2020, 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 GRAND CANYON COMMON STOCK

Number of shares of Grand Canyon common stock held immediately before the start of Class Period on January 4, 2018:

From January 5, 2018 to January 27, 2020, inclusive, I made the following transactions in Grand Canyon 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 January 27, 2020, I made the following transactions in Grand Canyon 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.” Benchmark Litigation has named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

ServiceMaster Global Holdings, Inc. Securities Class Litigation

Stock chart

Introduction

Securities class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors in the common stock of ServiceMaster Global Holdings, Inc. (“ServiceMaster” or the “Company”) (NYSE: SERV).  If you purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of ServiceMaster between February 26, 2019 and November 4, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”), you may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than June 9, 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.

ServiceMaster 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 ServiceMaster Securities Class Litigation

ServiceMaster, headquartered in Tennessee, is a leading provider of pest control services.  ServiceMaster’s largest and most profitable business segment is Terminix, a termite and pest control business that primarily operates in the United States.  Since at least as early as 2017, ServiceMaster began experiencing an increased number of legal claims from its customers in Mobile, Alabama as a result of increased activity of Formosan termites, a particularly invasive species.

The action alleges that, throughout the Class Period, ServiceMaster failed to disclose the growing risks arising from Formosan termite activity in Alabama and that the growth in related legal claims had prompted the Company to take mitigating actions throughout 2018.  Instead, ServiceMaster made false and misleadingly statements to investors suggesting that the Company had not identified material changes relating to termite damage claims when, in reality, ServiceMaster had known it was incurring, and would continue to incur, significantly increased legal costs from termite damages claims in Alabama.

On October 22, 2019, ServiceMaster announced disappointing preliminary revenue and earnings results for the third quarter of 2019 and revised its financial guidance for the quarter downward.  The Company’s press release attributed these negative developments to “termite damage claims arising primarily from Formosan termite activity” in Alabama, and acknowledged that ServiceMaster had known of the problem “starting in 2018.”  Additionally, the Company announced the sudden departure of the president of Terminix’s residential termite control business.  On this news, the price of ServiceMaster common stock fell $11.44 per share, or 20.38%, from the closing price of $56.14 on October 21, 2019, to close at $44.70 on October 22, 2019, on heavy trading volume.

Before markets opened on November 5, 2019, ServiceMaster announced that it had been impacted by “legacy risks,” including “termite damage claims.”  During an earnings call with analysts and investors held that same day, the Company disclosed that termite litigation had nearly doubled historical legal costs relating to its termite business and “we expect additional cost increases in 2020 before our mitigating actions fully take effect and we begin to gradually return them to historical norms.”  On this news, the price of ServiceMaster common stock fell $1.42 per share, or 3.5%, from the closing price of $40.57 November 4, 2019, to close at $39.15 on November 5, 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 SERVICEMASTER COMMON STOCK

Number of shares of ServiceMaster common stock held immediately before the start of Class Period on February 25, 2019:

From February 25, 2019 to November 4, 2019, inclusive, I made the following transactions in ServiceMaster 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 4, 2019, I made the following transactions in ServiceMaster 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.” Benchmark Litigation has named Lieff Cabraser one of the “Top 10 Plaintiffs’ Firms in America.”

 

Wells Fargo & Company Shareholder Derivative Litigation

Securities and Financial Fraud

Lieff Cabraser served as Co-Lead Counsel for the Fire and Police Pension Association of Colorado which, along with the City of Birmingham Retirement and Relief System, was court-appointed Co-Lead Plaintiffs in this consolidated shareholder derivative action. On April 7, 2020, Judge Jon S. Tigar of the Northern District of California granted final approval to a settlement including a $240 million cash payment and corporate governance reforms. The settlement is the largest insurer-funded derivative settlement in history. Read a copy of Judge Tigar’s Order.

In the litigation, Co-Lead Plaintiffs alleged 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 the consent of those customers, 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 Wells Fargo Board’s and senior officers’ knowledge or blatant disregard of it, 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.

In early 2019, a settlement (the “Settlement”) was 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 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”).

On May 14, 2019, the court preliminarily approved the proposed Settlement. On April 7, 2020, the court granted final approval of the Settlement. 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.

The court dismissed plaintiff’s third amended complaint, in a ruling which HMEPS has appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court heard oral argument in January 2020 and has not yet issued a ruling.

The case on appeal is Houston Municipal Employees Pension System v. BofI Holding, Inc., et al., Case No. 18-55415 (9th Cir.)

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.