According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Fenix had an inadequate inventory valuation methodology; (2) Fenix had an inadequate methodology to calculate goodwill impairment; (3) Fenix was engaging and/or had engaged in conduct that would result in an SEC investigation; and (4) as a result, Defendants' statements about Fenix's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
Recent Security Class Actions
According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Universal Health admitted patients based on its own financial considerations and not upon the medical necessity of the patient; (2) Universal Health would keep patients admitted until their insurance payments ran out in order to ensure the maximum payment for its services; (3) as a result, Universal Health's revenues from inpatient care relied on unsustainable practices; (4) in turn, Universal Health lacked effective internal control concerning its practices and policies of admitting patients; and (5) as a result, Universal Health's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. On December 7, 2016, Buzzfeed published an investigative story on Universal Health alleging, among other things, that Universal Health put profits ahead of people. On this news, shares of Universal Health fell $15.01 per share, or nearly 12%, from its previous closing price to close at $111.36 per share on December 7, 2016, damaging investors.
According to the law firm press release, the filed complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose: (1) that the Company was experiencing a large decline in high throughput sequencing instrument sales; (2) that the decline was negatively impacting the Company's revenue; (3) that the Company lacked visibility into trends that could have a substantial impact on the Company's financial results; (4) that, as such, the Company's revenue guidance was unreliable and overstated; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about Illumina's business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) New Oriental engaged in college application fraud; and (2) as a result, Defendants' statements about New Oriental's business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. On December 2, 2016, Reuters reported that eight former and current New Oriental employees informed Reuters that New Oriental "engaged in college application fraud, including writing application essays and teacher recommendations, and falsifying high school transcripts." On this news, shares of New Oriental fell $6.99 per share or over 14% from its previous closing price to close at $42.00 per share on December 2, 2016, damaging investors.
According to the law firm press release, Zimmer, through various subsidiaries and related entities, designs develops and manufactures medical equipment. The company offers orthopedic and dental reconstructive implants, spinal implants, trauma products, and related surgical products.
According to the law firm press release, the filed complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company's private label business was underperforming; (2) the Company's acquisition strategy was underperforming; (3) the Company had overstated its full-year 2016 guidance; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' statements about TreeHouse's business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
According to the law firm press release, on March 24, 2016, the Company completed the acquisition of Health Net, Inc. ("Health Net") for approximately $6 billion, including the assumption of debt. The acquisition was accounted for as a business combination, which requires that assets acquired and liabilities assumed be recognized at their fair values as of the acquisition date.
According to the law firm press release, Adeptus Health owns and operates a network of independent freestanding emergency rooms in the United States.
According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Cognizant lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting; (2) certain improper payments were for permits and building licenses for some of its 12 facilities in India; and (3) as a result, defendants' statements about Cognizant's business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damage.
According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the FDA previously questioned whether the data from the 611 and 612 Studies were clinically meaningful; (2) the FDA advised defendants in December 2012 not to submit the New Drug Application based on data from the 611 and 612 Studies; and (3) as a result, defendants' public statements about Spectrum's business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
