|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 4298 | Stocks | 05/25/2005
A class action has been filed against Gravity Co., Ltd. (NasdaqNM:GRVY), certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between February 07, 2005 and May 12, 2005. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock.
According to a press release dated May 18, 2005, the complaint charges Gravity and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Act and the Exchange Act. Gravity develops and distributes online games in many countries across the world, especially in Japan, Taiwan, and Thailand. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued a Prospectus and Registration Statement in connection with the Company's IPO, and issued press releases subsequent to the IPO, which included numerous positive statements regarding demand for the Company's products and positive statements concerning the Company's growth prospects. As alleged in the complaint, these statements were materially false and misleading because defendants failed to disclose and/or misrepresented: (i) that the Company's core product - Ragnarok - Online which traditionally has accounted for 95% of the Company's revenue was, at the time of the IPO, suffering from declining customer demand and increased competition. In fact, contrary to the appearance of the growth presented in the Prospectus, sales of Ragnarok Online were in a material state of decline; (ii) that the Company's mobile animation business was then being negatively impacted by material adverse trends. In fact, the Company's animation business had all but disintegrated; and (iii) that the Company's royalties and license fees business was then being negatively impacted by certain material adverse trends in the Company's Chinese operations. Growth in the Company's Chinese business was one of the primary keys for the Company's future business. In fact, as portrayed in the Prospectus, China was projected to grow faster than any other country in terms of its demand for the Company's online game-related services. Though defendants made an effort to demonstrate China's massive growth potential for online gaming demand, the fact was that the Company's Chinese business was in peril and in a state of decline - not growth. The complaint further alleges that on or around May 12, 2005, the Company shocked the market when it announced that its financial results for the first quarter of 2005 were lower than expected. On this news, the Company's ADSs plunged to an all time low of $5.60, a more than 70% drop from the Class Period high of $13.50 per share - the IPO price. If you bought Gravity Co., Ltd. securities between February 07, 2005 and May 12, 2005, inclusive, and would like to obtain information about the lawsuit, then you are invited to call (866) 467-1400 to speak with an attorney. At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Stocks Cases of Interest According to a press release dated April 11, 2008, the class action is brought against Oppenheimer Holdings Inc., Oppenheimer & Co. Inc, Oppenheimer Asset Management and Freedom Investments Inc. (collectively, "Oppenheimer"), in connection with the sale of auction rate securities, auction rate preferred stock, auction market preferred stock, variable rate preferred securities, money market preferred securities, periodic auction rate securities and auction rate bonds (collectively, "Auction Rate Securities").
Several class actions have been filed against electricity generation utility IDACORP, Inc. (NYSE:IDA) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between February 1, 2002, and June 4, 2002. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The parties have reached a $90 million settlement in an enforcement action filed by the SEC against mutual fund manager Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Ltd., on behalf of stockholders who purchased the company’s mutual funds between 1996 and December 2001. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. Many company retirement plans that encouraged investment in the company stock plan have taken large losses over the past few years. A class action has been filed against TV-top cablebox manufacturer Scientific-Atlanta, Inc. and certain company officials on behalf of current and former employees whose retirement plans were invested in the company's stock. The action alleges that the executives breached their fiduciary responsibilities in violation of federal labor law when they knew of the company's financial problems but continued to encourage employees to purchase stock for their plans, sometimes while selling their own shares. The action seeks compensatory and punitive damages. According to a press release dated May 1, 2008, a class action has been commenced on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of MAT Five LLC (“MAT Five”) pursuant and/or traceable to a false and misleading Private Placement Memorandum (“PPM”) on or about December 18, 2006 and/or its Supplements and who were damaged thereby.
According to a law firm press release, a complaint filed June 11, 2008 alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and financial results. Specifically, defendants downplayed and concealed IndyMac's growing exposure to non-performing assets, particularly loans in its pay-option adjustable-rate mortgage ("Option ARM") and homebuilder construction portfolios, and made numerous positive representations regarding the Company's capital position to alleviate investors' fears concerning the Company's capital erosion. As a result of defendants' false statements, IndyMac stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a Class Period high of $24.55 per share in October 2007.
|
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
