According to the law firm press release, the complaint alleges throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that Defendant had donated funds through nonprofit organizations to the University of Utah for the purpose of funneling those funds back into NantHealth; (2) that, as such, the Company and Defendant participated in the violation of federal tax laws—exposing the Company to possible civil and criminal liability; (3) that the Company improperly recorded orders received from the University of Utah as GPS Cancer test orders; (4) that, as a result, the Company reported false and inflated GPS Cancer order figures for the third quarter of 2016; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial statements and Defendants' statements about NantHealth's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading.
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) Graña y Montero was aware that its Brazilian partner Odebrecht S.A. paid bribes to former Peruvian President Alejandro Toledo to win construction work on a road traveling from Peru to Brazil; and (2) as a result, defendants' statements about Graña y Montero's business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. On February 24, 2017, Reuters published an article highlighting a report that Graña y Montero knew about $20 million in bribes paid to former Peruvian President Alejandro Toledo by its partner Odebrecht. On this news, shares of Graña y Montero fell $1.77 per share or over 34% to close $3.32 per share on February 24, 2017.
According to the law firm press release, the complaint alleges that throughout the class period Defendants issued materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Sito's growth of bookings would not propel the Company's fourth fiscal quarter 2016 media placement revenues and revenue growth to the level represented during the Class Period; (ii) Sito was aware that the election would impact the Company's fourth fiscal quarter 2016 revenue, (iii) clients' campaign spending and media placement revenues in the fourth quarter 2016 was highly dependent on the elections; (iv) the Company's growth in media placement revenues would not occur in the fourth fiscal quarter 2016; (iv) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's statements, as well as Defendants' statements about Sito's business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
According to the law firm press release, DaVita provides kidney dialysis services for patients suffering from chronic kidney failure or end-stage renal disease. The Company operates kidney dialysis centers and provides related lab services in outpatient dialysis centers, and provides acute inpatient dialysis services in approximately 900 hospitals and related laboratory services in the United States. DaVita made contributions to a purported charitable foundation called the American Kidney Fund ("AKF"), a group that provides financial assistance toward patients' health insurance premiums.
According to the law firm press release, Regulus is a biopharmaceutical company that focuses on the discovery and development of drugs that target microRNAs to treat and prevent various diseases, including hepatitis C infections, cardiovascular, fibrosis, oncology, immune-inflammatory, and metabolic diseases. One of its main clinical development products is RG-101, a GalNAc-conjugated anti-miR targeting miR-122 to treat patients with hepatitis C virus infection.
According to the law firm press release, Southern Company is a utility holding company based in Atlanta, Georgia. Southern Company's operating subsidiaries include public utility companies located throughout the Southeastern United States, including Mississippi Power, Georgia Power, Alabama Power, Southern Power and Gulf Power.
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.
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.
