Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 09/26/2013 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: March 23, 2010

According to the complaint filed March 23, 2010, the securities sold by the defendants were offered and promoted under high-pressure sales seminars by so-called investment gurus.

The securities offered by the Defendants were "Property Contracts" which they purported to yield "cash flows" within six months. The complaint alleges the defendants failed to register the securities and made other misrepresentations and omissions in connection with the sale of such securities.

On April 23, 2010, the defendants filed a motion to transfer the case to the U. S. District Court District of Utah. The motion was granted on October 15, 2010. On March 18, 2011, the plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint. The defendants responded by filing motions to dismiss in September and October 2011.

On April 16, 2012, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint.

On April 18, 2012, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part defendants' motions to dismiss. Plaintiffs were granted leave to file an Amended Complaint.

On August 5, 2013, the Court issued an Order granting the motion to dismiss certain defendants (including the issuer defendant) pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2). On the same date, the Court also issued an Order staying this case.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Misc. Financial Services
Headquarters: Canada

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol:
Company Market: Privately Traded
Market Status: Privately Held

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: D. Utah
DOCKET #: 10-CV-01172
JUDGE: Hon. James Ware
DATE FILED: 03/23/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/05/2008
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/01/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Narancic & Katzman, PC
    325 Sharon Park Drive, Suite 736 , Narancic & Katzman, PC , CA 94025
    650-814-7688 650-618-2700 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Utah
DOCKET #: 10-CV-01060
JUDGE: Hon. James Ware
DATE FILED: 03/18/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/05/2008
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/01/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Narancic & Katzman, PC
    325 Sharon Park Drive, Suite 736 , Narancic & Katzman, PC , CA 94025
    650-814-7688 650-618-2700 ·
  2. Utah Litigation Center
    10421 South Jordan Gateway, Suite 600, Utah Litigation Center, UT 84095
    801.649.2900 801.649.2900 · contact@866utahlaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date