|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 5211 | Stocks | 11/06/2008
According to the complaint, on or about September 24, 2007, the defendants filed a Form F-1 Registration Statement (the “Registration Statement”) with the SEC for the Offering. On or about October 18, 2007, the Prospectus with respect to the Offering (the “Prospectus”), which forms part of the Registration Statement, became effective and more than 9.8 million shares of Noah Education’s ADSs were sold to the public at $14.00 per ADS, thereby raising more than $137 million.
The complaint alleges that the Registration Statement and Prospectus failed to disclose that the Company was experiencing an increase in raw materials costs which had negatively impacted its earnings. On November 19, 2007, the defendant issued a press release announcing its financial results for the quarter ended September 30, 2007. Among other things, the Company reported that its gross profit margins had dramatically declined from 59.4% in the same period the prior year to 50.2% in the quarter. The press release attributed the declining margins to “an increase in the purchasing cost of certain raw material components of DLDs such as flash chips and memory boards, during July and August.” In response to this news, the price of Noah Education ADSs dropped from $12.46 per ADS to $6.72 per ADS on extremely heavy trading volume. If you bought Noah Education Holdings, Ltd. securities and would like to obtain information about the Noah Education Holdings, Ltd. lawsuit, then you are invited to call Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC toll free at (866) 467-1400 to speak with an attorney or visit www.kgscounsel.com. 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 The parties have reached a tentative $1.5 million settlement of a class action filed against automotive parts manufacturer Federal-Mogul Corporation (OTCBB: FDMLQ, formerly NYSE: FMO) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 22, 1998, and May 25, 2000. To recover under the settlement, a completed proof of claim postmarked no later than January 9, 2004, must be mailed to the claims administrator. A class action has been filed against Terayon Communication Systems, Inc. (TERN), certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 28, 2004 and March 1, 2006. 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. A class action has been filed against Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: NOVN) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 29, 2001, and April 28, 2003.
A class action has been filed against Fidelity Management & Research Company and FMR Company, Inc., on behalf of all shareholders in the Fidelity Contrafund, the Fidelity Growth & Income Fund, the Fidelity Magellan Fund, the Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund, and the Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund, who allege that the companies have charged them excessive fees for the management of the funds, in violation of federal securities laws. A class action has been filed against Magma Design Automation, Inc. (NasdaqNM:LAVA), certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 23, 2002 and April 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. A class action has been filed against certain of the former officers of camera company Polaroid Corporation (formerly OTCBB: PRDCQ and PRDQE, NYSE: PRD) and its former auditor, KPMG LLP, by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between April 2 and August 16, 2001. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock. |
|
© 2000 - 2009 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
