|
|
|
Hausfeld LLP Files Class Action Suit
Securities Class Action |
2012/01/20 10:12
|
Hausfeld LLP has filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of those who sold HearUSA common stock between January 18, 2011 and July 31, 2011, inclusive. The lawsuit, filed January 18, 2012, seeks to pursue remedies against Siemens Hearing Instruments, Inc. (“Siemens”) for violations of Sections 10(b), 9(a)(2) and 18(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b), 78i(a)(2), and 78r(a)] and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5]. Siemens is engaged, in part, in the manufacture of hearing products, and HearUSA was involved in the distribution of Siemens’ hearing products. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and is captioned MTB Investment Partners, LP vs. Siemens Hearing Instruments, Inc.
The complaint alleges that Siemens engaged in a fraudulent scheme to drive down the price of HearUSA common stock in an attempt to acquire HearUSA’s assets for less than their fair market value by, in part, filing false and misleading statements with the SEC. The result of Siemens’ false and misleading statements, according to the complaint, was to drive down the market price of HearUSA common stock from 90¢/share on January 18, 2011 to 35¢/share on July 28, 2011.
According to the complaint, Siemens made a number of false and/or misleading statements in its public filings which caused HearUSA stock to plummet. These public filings stated that Siemens at no point had the intention to acquire HearUSA, despite the fact that it had been in the advanced stages of a negotiated buyout process for HearUSA. The public filings further stated that Siemens, if it wanted to acquire HearUSA, could do so at no consideration to shareholders because of debts owed to Siemens by HearUSA. The complaint alleges that this assertion misrepresented the status and extent of the debt owed to Siemens by HearUSA and Siemens’ ability to acquire HearUSA pursuant to the credit agreement entered into between the two companies. The complaint alleges that, in making these statements, Siemens effectively told the market that HearUSA stock was worthless, and that the market responded accordingly.
If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, William Butterfield of Hausfeld LLP at (202)540-7200 or via email at wbutterfield@hausfeldllp.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge rules against NYC court protest organizers
Court News |
2012/01/20 10:11
|
A judge has ruled demonstrators don't have a First Amendment right to protest Friday afternoon in front of a New York City federal courthouse that has hosted several major terrorism trials.
Judge Lewis Kaplan said Thursday he wouldn't order the federal government to let an Occupy the Courts demonstration occur outside the lower Manhattan courthouse. He says the space isn't a public forum and the government acted reasonably in denying a permit.
A government lawyer says the courthouse poses unique security concerns in part because of terrorism fears.
Protest organizers had asked the judge to overturn the General Services Administration's rejection of their permit application. Their lawsuit said their First Amendment rights were violated.
The nationwide protest marks the second anniversary of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling against limits on spending by independent organizations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court throws out judge-drawn Texas electoral maps
Court Watch |
2012/01/20 05:12
|
The Supreme Court on Friday threw out electoral maps drawn by federal judges in Texas that favored minorities. The decision ultimately could affect control of the U.S. House of Representatives and leaves the fate of Texas' April primaries unclear.
The justices ordered the three-judge court in San Antonio to come up with new plans that pay more attention to maps created by Texas' Republican-dominated state Legislature. All four of the state's new congressional seats could swing based on the outcome.
But the Supreme Court did not compel the use of the state's maps in this year's elections, as Texas wanted. Only Justice Clarence Thomas said he would have gone that far.
The court's unsigned opinion thus did not blaze any new trails in election law or signal retreat from a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, as some supporters of the law feared would result from this case.
Still, the outcome appeared to favor Republicans by instructing the judges to stick more closely to what the Legislature did, said election law expert Richard Hasen, a professor at the University of California, Irvine, law school. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Class Action Filings Increase Slightly in 2011
Topics in Legal News |
2012/01/19 10:12
|
Federal securities fraud class action filing activity increased slightly in 2011, according to Securities Class Action Filings—2011 Year in Review, a semiannual report prepared by the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse in cooperation with Cornerstone Research. A total of 188 federal securities class actions were filed in 2011 compared with 176 filings in 2010, with an equal number of actions (94) being filed in the first and second halves of the year. The number of class actions filed was 3.1 percent below the annual average of 194 filings observed between 1997 and 2010.
Consistent with a trend first observed in 2010, filings related to merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions continued to constitute a large percentage of total filings, accounting for 22.9 percent of 2011 activity. There were 20 such filings in the first half of 2011 and 23 filings in the last six months of the year. In 2010, M&A filings constituted 22.7 percent of all filings.
Litigation against Chinese issuers listed on U.S. exchanges through reverse mergers represented a major component of filings activity during 2011, although evidence indicates that this type of litigation is subsiding. In 2011, 33 such actions were filed, constituting 17.6 percent of all federal securities class actions. This activity occurred predominantly in the first half of the year, when 24 of these actions were filed; only nine were brought in the last six months, including five filed in the last three months of the year. In contrast, there were only nine such cases filed during 2010, suggesting both a rapid peak and decline in this type of litigation activity. Compared to other class action securities fraud complaints, Chinese reverse merger filings are more likely to allege violations of generally accepted accounting principles and financial restatements and are less likely to allege insider trading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California high court to consider pot dispensaries
Court Watch |
2012/01/19 10:12
|
The state's high court will attempt to clarify marijuana's hazy legal status in California.
The California Supreme Court on Wednesday voted unanimously to review how cities and counties regulate marijuana dispensaries.
The court will address whether local governments can bar the pot shops despite voter passage of Proposition 215, which legalized marijuana use with a doctor's recommendation.
The court also will consider the continued conflict between state and federal authorities, who don't recognize Proposition 215. Under federal law, marijuana is illegal in all forms.
An appellate court last year struck down Long Beach's attempt to license pot stores, ruling that the local ordinance conflicted with federal law. Another appellate court upheld Riverside's right to close and prohibit dispensaries. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Investment Fraud Litigation |
|
|
|
|
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
|
|
|
| |
| |
| |
|
The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
