Qiao Xing Mobile Communication Company, Ltd. Summary: The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, the Company made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company was unable to provide the investing public with accurate and current information regarding its current financial results, operations or governance; (2) the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. As a result of Company’s wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Class members have suffered significant losses and damages.
On April 30, 2012, the Company disclosed that it would not be able to file its annual report for the year ended December 31, 2011 “due to delays in obtaining certain required documents and information necessary for its public accounting firm to complete their audit procedures in a timely manner.”
On May 2, 2012, the Company announced the immediate resignation of its Chief Financial Officer. On this news Qiao Xing Mobile shares declined $0.20 per share or 29%, to close at $0.48 per share.
On May 17, 2012, the NYSE delisted Qiao Xing Mobile shares. When the stock started trading on over-the-counter market the next day, the stock declined $0.33 per share or nearly 69%, to close at $0.15 per share on May 18, 2012.
On April 15, 2013, the Court appointed Mr. Ghodooshim to serve as lead plaintiff and approved Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP as of lead counsel.
SIC Code: 3661
Industry: Communications Equipment
WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.
Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top