Aussie Bank Westpac Inks $25M Deal In Rate-Rigging Suit
Caleb Drickey, 02 March 2021
Australian bank Westpac has agreed to a $25 million deal settling claims that it conspired with a cabal of banking institutions to rig the price of derivatives based on an Australian foreign exchange benchmark.
Tuesday’s proposed deal would also compel Westpac, which denied all illegal conduct or wrongdoing, to turn over information related to the alleged price-fixing conspiracy. This would, according to the investors, strengthen cases against Westpac’s co-defendants and lead to similarly-structured deals with the accused conspirators.
In a memorandum, representatives for the proposed class expressed confidence that the newly announced deal would lead to further victories against defendant banks. Continue reading “Article: Aussie Bank Westpac Inks $25M Deal In Rate-Rigging Suit”
Investor Alert: Kaplan Fox Investigates FuelCell Energy, Inc. For Potential Securities Fraud
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP, 06 October 2020
NEW YORK, Oct. 6, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP (www.kaplanfox.com) is investigating claims on behalf of investors who purchased shares of FuelCell Energy, Inc. (“FuelCell Energy” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: FCEL), a manufacturer of fuel cell power plants for electric power generation.
In 2017, FuelCell Energy reportedly won three significant contract awards from PSEG Long Island worth up to $800 million in future revenue potential over the life of the contracts. On October 2, 2020, FuelCell Energy closed a secondary public offering of stock by selling about 50 million shares of common stock at $2.10 per share.
Continue reading “Article: Investor Alert: Kaplan Fox Investigates FuelCell Energy, Inc. For Potential Securities Fraud”
Investor Alert: Kaplan Fox Investigates Nano-X Imaging For Potential Securities Fraud
PRNewswire, 18 September 2020
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP (www.kaplanfox.com) is investigating claims on behalf of investors of Nano-X Imaging Ltd. (“Nano-X” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: NNOX). A complaint has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased the publicly traded securities of Nano-X between August 21, 2020 and September 15, 2020, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
According to the complaint, Nano-X’s securities began trading on the NASDAQ on August 21, 2020. Continue reading “Article: Investor Alert: Kaplan Fox Investigates Nano-X Imaging For Potential Securities Fraud”
Mark Kaplan is a Senior Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer of Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. Prior to that position, Kaplan was the General Counsel for Société Générale for the Americas, leading its Legal and Compliance departments. Before joining Société Générale, he was the General Counsel for CIBC World Markets Corp.’s U.S. operations, and previously served as the Director of Litigation at Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. Mr. Kaplan holds a B.A. from Bucknell University, where he graduated Magna Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa, and a J.D. from Columbia University Law School.
Continue reading “Subject: Mark Kaplan”
Chinese coal company’s share placement produces interesting collection of investors
sharesleuth, 13 September 2010
Sharesleuth took a closer look at the registration statement covering the resale of those shares, and found that no fewer than eight people who participated in the placement have been the subject of Securities and Exchange Commission actions or criminal prosecutions.
The list includes at least four people who were directly or indirectly linked to stock-manipulation schemes. Several other investors were previously involved in a small cluster of U.S. companies whose placements were manipulated by a ring of boiler room brokerages in the 1990s.
Read full article.
ATSI Communications, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd.
Smarter Legal Research, 02 September 2009
More detailed factual background is provided in our previous opinion in this case, ATSI Commc’ns, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd., 493 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2007) (” ATSI I”).
ATSI describes itself as a firm which was “founded in December of 1993 to capitalize on the opportunities anticipated by trends towards deregulation and privatization of telecommunications markets within Mexico and other Latin American countries.” In 1999, needing capital, ATSI issued four series of convertible preferred stock (“Preferred Stock”), shares of which were convertible, with minimal restrictions, to ATSI common shares in increasing amounts as the price of ATSI common shares declined. Because there was no limit on the number of common shares into which the Preferred Stock could convert, securities such as these are called “floorless” convertibles. ATSI I, 493 F.3d at 94. A holder of such Preferred Stock who wanted to increase ownership or acquire the company could actually benefit from a decline in ATSI share price. Accordingly, ATSI elicited the purchasers’ representations that they would not sell shares short, or were not purchasing with an intent to resell. Id. at 95-96. ATSI issued Preferred Stock at various points to (among others) defendants The Shaar Fund, Ltd. (“Shaar Fund”) and Rose Glen Capital Management, L.P. (“Rose Glen”).
Read Full Article
In Pursuit of the Naked Short
Alexis Stokes, Texas State University
Journal of Law and Business 5/1 (Spring 2009)
This article explores the origins of naked short-selling litigation; considers
the failures of significant naked short-selling lawsuits in federal court;
surveys the obstacles erected collectively by constitutional standing requirements, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, brokerage firms, death spiral financiers, and the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation; examines the efficacy of Regulation SHO, SEC rule 10b-21, and new FINRA rules; discusses recent state legislation and state court litigation; and identifies non-litigation options to curb naked short-selling. Ultimately, this article seeks to answer the question: If manipulative naked short-selling is more than a mythological scapegoat for
small cap failure, what remedies are, or should be, available?
PDF (62 Pages): Article In Pursuit of the Naked Short
JPMorgan faces $2.2B Fraud Lawsuit over Bonds
Reuters cited by RGM Communications via Wayback, 3 February 2006
JPMorgan Chase faces a civil lawsuit accusing the No. 3 U.S. bank of defrauding bond investors and others out of at least $2.2 billion over more than 20 years.
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday with the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, seeks class-action status.
It accuses New York-based JPMorgan and its predecessors of deleting records for $46.8 billion of bonds that investors had not cashed in, covering up its errors, refusing to pay back bondholders, and collecting fees it did not deserve.
Access archived page.
COURTS WIELD HARSH PENALTIES FOR ABUSING THE DISCOVERY PROCESS
Evelyn Alfonso , 30 January 2004
A federal district court last summer issued the ultimate sanction of dismissal due to plaintiffs= abuse of the discovery process and persistent refusal to abide by the court=s discovery orders. Internet Law Library, Inc. v. Southridge Capital Management, 2003 WL 21537782 (S.D.N.Y. July 8, 2003). ITIS, Inc., formerly known as Internet Law Library, Inc., and its CEO, along with several of its shareholders, brought an action against defendant investors alleging their involvement in a scheme to defraud plaintiffs and to manipulate downward the price of ITIS stock in
violation of federal and state laws. Internet Law Library, Inc. v. Southridge Capital Management, 223 F. Supp. 2d 474, 477-78 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).
Judge Robert L. Carter of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the suit with prejudice as to all defendants due to plaintiffs= repeated attempts to expand and misconstrue the court=s orders on the ground that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(C) authorizes dismissal of a plaintiff=s complaint along with other sanctions if a party Afails to obey an order to provide or permit discovery.@ Internet Law Library, 2003 WL 21537782 at *3. While dismissal is indeed the harshest sanction available to a court, it is appropriate where a party who has disobeyed an order has done so willfully, in bad faith, or is in some way at fault. Id. The court held that plaintiffs= failure to respect the court and its orders justifies dismissal of the complaint as both a remedy and a deterrent to future misconduct. Id. at *4. Continue reading “Article: COURTS WIELD HARSH PENALTIES FOR ABUSING THE DISCOVERY PROCESS”