Search for: "DEFENDER SECURITY COMPANY"
Results 21 - 40
of 17,586
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Sep 2023, 1:17 pm
” The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [read post]
24 Feb 2022, 1:39 pm
In terms of the industries in which the defendant companies are involved in the suits filed in 2021 against non-U.S. companies, the largest portion of suits involved companies in the software and programming industries (10), seven of which were against companies headquartered in China, and companies in the biotechnology and drugs industry (7). [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 9:50 pm
” The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 11:48 am
“In short, there is no securities fraud in this case—only a plaintiff seeking to secure a windfall based on a temporary drop in stock price that cannot be pinned to anything approaching fraud by any of these defendants,” the company argues. [read post]
28 Aug 2009, 9:03 am
Joseph said Wednesday he "stands by the original (lawsuit) and allegations that the defendants are fraudulently selling unregistered securities. [read post]
17 Apr 2024, 1:05 am
” The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [read post]
24 Dec 2021, 7:57 am
” The plaintiff alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 12:53 am
The defendants moved to dismiss. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 1:45 am
Companies: One of the more interesting phenomena in the U.S class action securities arena has been the level of filings targeting non-U.S. companies. [read post]
29 Mar 2022, 1:00 pm
Thus, while the 59 suits against life sciences companies out of a total of 210 securities suit filings in 2021 represented about 28% of all filings, the 80 securities suits against life sciences companies out of a total of 324 securities suits overall in 2020 represented nearly 25% of all securities suit filings. [read post]
1 Mar 2023, 12:46 pm
Life Sciences Companies,” states that there were a total of 43 securities suits filed against life sciences companies in 2022, compared to 59 in 2021. [read post]
24 May 2012, 1:40 am
However, in a securities class action lawsuit, courts will use the fraud-on-the-market presumption to presume reliance if the defendant company’s shares trade in an efficient market. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 1:46 pm
One of the most substantial securities litigation phenomena so far in 2021 has been the rising tide of securities litigation relating to SPACs and SPAC-acquired companies. [read post]
23 Feb 2022, 1:55 pm
In the latest post-SPAC-merger securities class action lawsuit, a plaintiff shareholder has filed a securities suit against a rare earth mining and processing company that completed a SPAC merger in November 2020. [read post]
28 Nov 2023, 12:05 pm
” The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [read post]
19 Jan 2022, 1:06 pm
” The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [read post]
5 May 2021, 7:23 am
Maroney and two relief defendants, Celtic Enterprises, LLC, a company he runs, as well as Maroney’s wife, Tonya L. [read post]
20 Jun 2016, 3:40 pm
However, according to a recent law firm report, life sciences company defendants fared well in securities litigation in 2015. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 10:26 am
” The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 1:13 am
In an August 19, 2011 order (here), Judge Batts granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss with respect to certain of the plaintiffs’ allegations, but she also ruled that the plaintiffs had adequately stated claims under the Securities Act of 1933 with respect to the company’s 2007, February 2008 and May 2008 securities offerings. [read post]
