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.

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.

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b, 20(a), 20A of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements by virtue of the Company improper recognition of revenues in violation of GAAP. Plaintiffs settled this action for a $2.85 million cash payment to class members.

The Rosen Law Firm is currently serving as co-Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleges violations of the Exchange Act and Securities Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements.  The firm secured a $8.7 million certain parties.  The case continues against other defendants.

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 Securities Act and Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false financial statements. The parties agreed to settle this action for $1.5 million in cash.

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the Court of Chancery of State of Delaware, brought in connection with a “going private” transaction.  The parties settled this action for $1.5 million in additional compensation to shareholders.

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho.  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 financial statements and business condition.  The parties settled this action for $450,000.

The Rosen Law firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the 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 of 1934 in connection with the Company’s failure to disclose material related party transactions in periodic reports it filed with the SEC.  The parties settled this action for $2.65 million in cash.  Separately, in the related case Omanoff v. Patrizio & Zhao LLC, No. 2:14-cv-723-FSH-JBC, The Rosen Law Firm was sole lead counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.  The complaint alleged that Patrizio & Zhao, LLC, as auditor for Keyuan Petrochemicals, Inc., issued materially false and misleading audit opinions.  The parties have settled this action for $850,000 in cash.  The total recovery for Keyuan investors was $3.5 million.

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern 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 false financial statements. The parties have settled this action for $500,000 in cash—resulting in a recovery of nearly 100% of damages.

The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with material misrepresentations in the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus. Plaintiffs and the underwriters have agreed to settle their claims for $14 million proof of claim in bankruptcy court.