Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 07/20/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: February 24, 2017

According to the law firm press release, the complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that Source Capital was at risk of having its registrations terminated for wrongdoing; (2) that the Company was utilizing paid stock promoters to artificially inflate the price of the Company’s stock; (3) that a member of the Company’s Board of Directors was secretly paying stock promoters via an undisclosed entity; (4) that Company insiders were selling their stock during the paid promotion, taking advantage of the artificially inflated stock price; (5) that the Company’s purported audit firm claimed to operate at a location that was actually vacant; (6) that the controlling partner behind the Company’s auditor was banned by the SEC and PCAOB for conducting fraudulent audits or reviews of public companies while performing little or no work and without being licensed; (7) that the Company’s auditor was signing off on the Company’s financial disclosures without conducting a proper review; and (8) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ statements about Cemtrex’s business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Capital Goods
Industry: Constr. - Supplies & Fixtures
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CETX
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: E.D. New York
DOCKET #: 17-CV-01067
JUDGE: Hon. Joan M. Azrack
DATE FILED: 02/24/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/11/2016
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/22/2017
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP (New York)
    122 East 42nd Street, Suite 2920 , Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP (New York), NY 10168
    (212) 682-5340 (212) 884-0988 ·
No Document Title Filing Date