The Investor’s Insider:
Protecting Against Securities Fraud

Fitbit named in securities class action

Posted on: January 12th, 2016 by Steve Larson

Just days after being sued in a class action by consumers relating to alleged defective heart rate monitoring results, Fitbit, Inc. was hit with a proposed shareholder class action lawsuit in California federal court that claims the fitness tracking device company lied in statements issued in connection with its initial public offering and afterwards about the reliability of its heart rate monitoring technology. Read more…

Stoll Berne Settles Foreign Exchange Class Action with BNYM for $180 Million

Posted on: December 8th, 2015 by Keith Dubanevich

U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan recently approved a $180 million settlement in a proposed class action case against Bank of New York Mellon Corp. The lawsuit alleged that the bank operated a deceptive foreign currency exchange program.  Stoll Berne represented the putative class along with Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP.  The firms represented the State of Oregon on behalf of several public pension funds and others who claimed BNY Mellon misled investors by making deceptive public statements about its foreign exchange program in violation of securities laws.

The settlement concluded long-running litigation first brought in 2011, alleging that BNY Mellon told customers it provided the “best execution” for foreign currency trades when in reality it bought the currencies at the lowest price of the day and sold it at the highest, pocketing the difference.

In March, BNY Mellon paid $714 million to settle fraud claims by the SEC, the U.S. Department of Justice, the New York attorney general and others over the foreign exchange program. BNY Mellon also admitted certain facts and agreed to fire two executives implicated in the scheme.

Hewlett Packard settles securities class action

Posted on: June 11th, 2015 by Steve Larson

Hewlett Packard has agreed to pay $100 million to end a proposed securities class action over its $11 billion acquisition of British software company, Autonomy Corp.  The proposed settlement with the shareholders comes after the federal judge for the Northern District of California, Judge Breyer, gave preliminary approval in March to a separate deal that promises corporate governance reforms to settle HP shareholders’ derivative claims over the Autonomy acquisition.

Tuesday’s proposed settlement calls for Judge Breyer to certify a class of investors that bought HP stock between the company’s August 2011 announcement of the Autonomy deal and its November 2012 disclosure of an $8.8 billion write-down.  The litigation stems from HP’s acquisition of Autonomy and subsequent $8.8 billion write-down.

The case is In re: HP Securities Litigation, case number 3:12-cv-05980, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Deutsche Bank will pay $2.5 billion to end Libor investigation

Posted on: April 23rd, 2015 by Steve Larson

US and British authorities have agreed to settle with Deutsche Bank for $2.5 billion and a guilty plea, with the bank admitting to wrong doing that led to the manipulation of the London interbank interest rate (Libor), used as the primary benchmark for short-term interest rates worldwide.

United States Supreme Court Applies a “Reasonable Standard” to Corporations’ “Beliefs”

Posted on: March 24th, 2015 by Nadine Gartner

The United States Supreme Court issued today its opinion in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council, a case previously discussed here. Read more…

Stoll Berne Seeks Class Certification in “London Whale” Suit

Posted on: February 19th, 2015 by Keith Dubanevich

Stoll Berne, along with co-counsel Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Grant & Eisenhofer PA, and Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP, has filed for class certification in its case against JPMorgan Chase & Co. Read more…

Pfizer to Pay $400M to Settle Shareholder Suit

Posted on: January 28th, 2015 by Nadine Gartner

Pharmaceutical company Pfizer Inc. has reached an agreement in principle to pay $400 million to settle a class-action securities lawsuit. Read more…

No Violation of PSLRA Discovery Stay for Use of Documents Received After Stay Allegedly in Effect

Posted on: September 3rd, 2014 by Mark Friel

The central question in the Ninth Circuit’s recent opinion in Petrie v. Electronic Game Card, Inc., No. 12-55620, slip op. (9th Cir. July 30, 2014), was whether plaintiffs who issued subpoenas during a time in which no Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (“PSLRA”) discovery stay was in effect violated the PSLRA by using responsive documents received after a stay allegedly had come into existence. The court answered with an unqualified “no.” Read more…

Domestic Transaction Necessary But Not Sufficient to Invoke U.S. Securities Laws

Posted on: August 20th, 2014 by Nadine Gartner

The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that a domestic transaction is necessary to invoke U.S. securities laws but that, on its own, a domestic transaction is not sufficient. Read more…

ESOP Beneficiaries Are Entitled to More than “Coach Class” Fiduciary Duties

Posted on: June 25th, 2014 by Keith Dubanevich

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”) fiduciaries are not entitled to a special presumption of prudence.  Rather, they should be held to the same duty of prudence as other ERISA fiduciaries. Read more…

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds the Fraud-on-the-Market Doctrine

Posted on: June 23rd, 2014 by Keith Dubanevich

On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme court issued its opinion in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc. and upheld the fraud-on-the-market doctrine.  The doctrine sets forth that the market, including Wall Street analysts and other professional investors, reviews the material public information about the company and sets the price for a security based on that information. Read more…

Class Action Waiver Violates FINRA Rules

Posted on: April 28th, 2014 by Nadine Gartner

The Board of Governors of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) has held that Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (“Schwab”) violated FINRA rules when the firm attempted to keep investors from participating in class actions by adding waiver language to customer account agreements. Read more…

Legal Disclaimer

The information contained in this blog does not constitute legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this blog.

About this blog

The purpose of this blog is to provide information to the general public and to practitioners about developments that may impact Oregon investors.

About the authors

  • Steve Larson

  • Nadine Gartner
  • Steve Larson has been representing investors, consumers and employees in class actions in Oregon for over 20 years. He is a shareholder at the law firm of Stoll Berne in Portland, Oregon.
  • Keith Dubanevich

  • Nadine Gartner
  • Keith Dubanevich has extensive experience handling antitrust, consumer and securities cases. Until joining the Portland, Oregon law firm Stoll Berne as a shareholder, he was the Associate Attorney General and Chief of Staff at the Oregon Department of Justice.
  • Nadine Gartner

  • Nadine Gartner
  • Nadine Gartner’s practice focuses on complex business litigation and class actions. Prior to becoming a lawyer, Nadine worked as an investment banking analyst.
  • Mark Friel

  • Nadine Gartner
  • Mark Friel is a litigation attorney who practices in the areas of complex business, consumer, securities, antitrust, and class action litigation. He is a shareholder at the law firm of Stoll Berne in Portland, Oregon.
Follow stollberne on Twitter

Subscribe to this blog