Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 11/29/2010 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: August 10, 2010

According to the complaint dated August 10, 2010, many of the facts related to the 2006-AR 15 Trust Series of Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates pursuant or traceable to Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation's September 20, 2006 Registration Statement, and the accompanying Prospectus and Prospectus Supplement. This action arises from the sale of approximately $400 million in mortgage pass-through certificates pursuant to the Registration Statement. The Certificates were supported by pools of mortgage loans that the parent company or its affiliates originated or purchased.

The Offering Documents contained untrue statements of material fact, or omitted to state material facts necessary to make the statements therein not misleading, regarding: (i) the underwriting standards purportedly used in connection with the origination of the underlying mortgages; (ii) the maximum loan-to-value ratios used to qualify borrowers; and (iii) the appraisals of the properties underlying the mortgages.

On October 19, 2010, the Court issued an order denying the plaintiffs' Motion to Intervene and granted the defendants' motion, thereby dismissing the case with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Regional Banks
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: WFC
Company Market: New York SE
Market Status: Public (Listed)

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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 10-CV-3508
JUDGE: Hon. Richard Seeborg
DATE FILED: 08/10/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/20/2006
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/10/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy (Burlingame)
    840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200, Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy (Burlingame), CA 94010
    650.697.600 650.697.600 ·
  2. Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (Berkeley)
    715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (Berkeley), CA 94710
    510.725.3000 510.725.3000 · info@hbsslaw.com
  3. Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (New Seattle)
    1918 Eighth Ave. Suite 3300, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (New Seattle), WA 98101
    206.623.7292 206.623.0594 ·
  4. Levetown & Jenkins, LLP
    700 12th Streert, NW, Suite 700, Levetown & Jenkins, LLP
    (202) 379-4899 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date