Securities Fraud Lawsuits
The lawsuit alleges Kinross and certain of its former officers and directors violated of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated under Section 10(b, resulting from Kinross’ public statements between August 10, 2011 and January 16, 2012.
The lawsuit alleges Houston American Energy violated the federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading statements regarding the amount of recoverable oil reserves in the CPO4 drilling block (in which Houston American Energy owned a substantial interest), as well as the success of the Houston American Energy’s oil drilling efforts in that region.
The lawsuit argues that Regions Financial Corporation made materially false and misleading statements and omissions about the quality of Regions’ loans, the adequacy of its loan loss reserves, and that value of its Goodwill.
OmniVision is a leading global provider of CMOS image sensors to, among others, leading mobile phone and tablet manufacturers and original equipment manufacturers. OmniVision’s image sensors were used in several smartphone products including the 2009 and 2010 versions of the Apple iPhone.
The lawsuit alleges that OCZ Technology Group violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
This case alleges that the PhotoMedex falsely represented or omitted certain facts regarding PhotoMedex’s business status, performance and prospects regarding the efficacy of the PhotoMedex’s core product and the PhotoMedex’s financial status, success and prospects in Japan.
This case alleges Hemispherx Biopharma violated Federal Securities Laws (specifically Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. §78j(b) and 78(t)(a)) and Rule 10b-5.
The lawsuit alleges that KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership
The lawsuit alleged that Cyan, Inc.'s Registration Statement and Prospectus violated the Securities Act of 1933 by failing to warn investors that Cyan revenues depended on two limited life projects, a broadband stimulus project and a fiber-to-the-tower installation project, and that both projects were in the process of winding down.
The lawsuit asserts that Gentiva violated federal securities law, including the Securities Exchange Act of 1934