Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 09/09/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: June 11, 2019

According to the Complaint, Elastos purportedly seeks to “create a new kind of Internet, powered by blockchain technology” where users will be able to “own digital assets” such as digital books, movies, music, and games, and “generate wealth from them.” Users will be able to own, buy, and sell digital property without middlemen like Amazon or Apple, in the same manner that property is sold outside of the internet. Elastos claims that it will leverage blockchain technology to ensure digital assets are not compromised and to ensure transactions are safe and secure.

The Complaint alleges that in connection with the Elastos Initial Coin Offering, Defendants raised between $94 million and more than $200 million in digital cryptocurrencies by offering and selling unregistered securities in the form of ELA tokens (“ELA Tokens”), in direct violation of the Securities Act.

On July 10, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Remand the case to State Court. On February 6, 2020, the Court issued an Order denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand. On May 26, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiffs and Counsel. On June 24, two of the individual Defendants were voluntarily dismissed from the case. On July 29, Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Consumer Financial Services
Headquarters: China

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: N/A
Company Market: N/A
Market Status: N/A

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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 19-CV-05462
JUDGE: Hon. Gregory H. Woods
DATE FILED: 06/11/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/01/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/31/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP
  2. Raiti, PLLC
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 19-CV-05462
JUDGE: Hon. Gregory H. Woods
DATE FILED: 07/29/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/01/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/31/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP
  2. Raiti, PLLC
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available