Successes

In re USA Technologies, Inc. Sec. Litig., No. 19-cv-4565-JHS

The Rosen Law Firm was sole lead counsel in this consolidated class action in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and §§11b and 15 of the Securities Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and financial statements. The parties settled the action for $15.3 million in cash.

Christine Asia Co Ltd. v. Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., No. 15-md-2631 (CM) (SDA)

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Class Counsel in this multidistrict certified class action in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading business information.  The parties settled this action for $250 million in cash.

Kinzinger v. Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc., No. 03-0922608

The Rosen Law Firm served as sole Lead Counsel in this class action filed in Utah state court alleged violations of the Utah Securities Act against Paradigm Medical arising out of false and misleading statements made to investors in a $5.0 million private placement of securities. The court approved a $625,000 settlement on behalf of the private placement purchasers.

In re China Intelligent Lighting and Electronics, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 2:11-CV-02768 PSG (SSx)

The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements.  The parties agreed to partially settle this action for $631,600 in cash.  A default judgment was obtained against the issuer.

Ding v. Roka Bioscience, Inc., No. 14-8020 (FLW)

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for District of New Jersey. The complaint alleges violations of §§11 and 15 of the Securities Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading business information. The parties agreed to settle this case for $3.275 million in cash.

In re comScore, Inc. Virginia Shareholder Derivative Litigation, No. CL-2016-9465

The Rosen Law Firm was co-lead counsel in this shareholder derivative action in the Virginia state court.  The firm helped secure a global settlement of this action and a related federal derivative action consisting of a $10 million cash payment to comScore along with extensive corporate governance reforms.

In re Nature’s Sunshine Products, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 2:06-cv-00267-TS-SA

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Class Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s materially false and misleading statements concerning its financial statements and business practices. Following the certification of the class and extensive discovery, Plaintiffs agreed to settle this case for $6 million in cash.

Chanticleer Holdings, Inc., No. 12-CV-81123-JIC

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.  The complaint alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with material misrepresentations in the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued for the Company’s public offering of common stock and warrants.  The parties have agreed to settle this action for $850,000 in cash.

Tapia-Matos v. Caesarstone Sdot-Yam Ltd., No. 15-CV-6726 (JMF)

The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for Southern District of New York. The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements about the Company’s true financial condition and business prospects. The parties agreed to settle this action for $2.2 million in cash.

Hrasok v. Kraton Corporation, No. 18-CV-591

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the company’s issuance of materially false and misleading business information.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $1.5 million in cash.
Scroll to Top