Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 01/16/2014 (Other)

Filing Date: May 06, 2011

According to the complaint filed on May 06, 2011, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements about the Company by vastly overstating the Company's revenues and operations.

On April 28, analyst Alfred Little published a report which included more detailed factual allegations and Chinese tax filings allegedly showing that the Company had no or nearly no operations.

When the Company's true financial condition was revealed, the Company's stock price fell. Between April 25 and April 28, the Company's stock price fell from $4.12 per share to $2.47 per share, more than 40%, damaging investors.

Defendants replied with a detailed letter on May 3, 2011. The letter invited shareholders to view security camera footage of its factories in operation.
The Company's stock price rose dramatically.

The very next day, Alfred Little showed that the footage was fabricated. The footage showed rain. During the period in which he Company claimed the footage was shot, there had been no rain.

The Company was caught red handed, and the Company 's stock price fell again to close at $2.59 on very heavy volume on May 5, 2011.

On August 8, 2011, the Court appointed the Lead Plaintiff and approved of counsel for the case.

On September 8, 2011, the Lead Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint.

On January 30, 2012, the Court granted Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's claims were dismissed with leave to amend.

On March 5, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a second amended class action complaint. Defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss on April 20, 2012.

On June 4, 2012, the Court issued an Order denying defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

On January 27, 2013, the parties entered into a Stipulation of Settlement. This Settlement was preliminarily approved by the Court on March 13.

On July 9, 2013, the Court issued an Order approving the Settlement and dismissing this action with prejudice. The Court also awarded attorneys' fees and expenses.

On August 9, 2013, a Class Member filed a Notice appealing the Settlement.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Chemical Manufacturing
Headquarters: China

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: SCEI
Company Market: NASDAQ
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-03936
JUDGE: Hon.Percy Anderson
DATE FILED: 05/06/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/06/2009
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/05/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
    333 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A., CA 90071
    213.785.2610 213.226-4684 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-03936
JUDGE: Hon.Percy Anderson
DATE FILED: 03/05/2012
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/21/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/26/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Gold Bennett Cera & Sidener LLP
    595 Market Street, Suite 2300, Gold Bennett Cera & Sidener LLP, CA 94105-2835
    800.778.1822 415.777.5189 · info@gbcsf.com
No Document Title Filing Date