According to a press release dated March 01, 2010, the lawsuit alleges that shareholders of Landwin Management LLC, which was formed to purchase and manage investment properties, have lost their entire investment due to improper actions undertaken by some of its officers and board members. Among those cited by the lawsuit are: improper financial compensation to themselves and use of Company assets; false representation of business opportunities and potential profits; misconduct resulting in substantial damages to the investment entity; and enrichment through unlawful profits.

On August 27, 2010, a First Amended Class Action Complaint was filed by the Plaintiffs against the Defendants. On November 8, 2010, the Court issued an Order appointing lead Plaintiff and Counsel. On November 15, 2010, lead Plaintiff filed a motion to certify the class. On December 20, 2010, Defendants filed motions to dismiss the first amended Complaint. Defendants' motions to dismiss were denied on January 28, 2011. The motion to dismiss was granted with leave to amend. The Court also denied the motion to certify the class.

On February 16, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint. Defendants responded by filing motions to dismiss the case on March 28, 2011. On May 6, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion to certify the class. On June 7, 2011, the Court issued an Order granting in substantial part Defendants’ motions to dismiss. According to the Order, Defendants’ motions to dismiss were denied with respect to the Plaintiff’s claims for violations of California Corporations Code Section 25501.5 against Individual Defendants.

On June 27, 2011, the Court granted Defendants' motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's federal claims, leaving only two state-law claims remaining in this action. The Court also issued an order to show cause to the Plaintiff regarding the basis for this Court's jurisdiction over the remaining claims. The Plaintiff did not respond to the Court's order. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the action.

On July 17, 2011, the Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the District Court's decision on May 31, 2013.