Recent Successes

In re Magnachip Semiconductor Corp., No. 3:14-cv-01160-JST.

The Rosen Law Firm served as additional plaintiffs’ counsel in this class action pending in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of CA. Magnachip is a designer and manufacturer of semiconductors for consumer products such as smart phones. The complaint alleges that the company inflated financial results through accounting manipulations, sham transactions and kickbacks. Plaintiffs’ counsel secured a settlement of $23.5 million, which exceeds the median percentage of estimated damages of recent shareholder class action settlements. This settlement is also favorable considering the deteriorating financial condition of the company during the two year litigation process.

The action continues against defendant Avenue Capital, Magnachip’s largest and “controlling” shareholder.

Deering v. Galena Biopharma, Inc., No. 3:14-cv-00367-SI (Partial Settlement).
The Rosen Law Firm is currently serving as co-Lead Counsel in this class action pending in the U.S. District Court for District of Oregon.  The complaint alleges violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company concealing an undisclosed stock promotion scheme.  The firm secured  a partial settlement for $20 million consisting of $19 million in cash and $1 million in stock.  The case continues against other defendants.

In re Silvercorp Metals, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 12-CV-9456 (JSR). 
The Rosen Law Firm was counsel to lead plaintiff in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and  20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial information. The parties agreed to settle this action for $14 million in cash.

In re Textainer Financial Servs. Corp., No. CGC 05-440303
The Rosen Law Firm was Co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the California Superior Court, San Francisco County alleging breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the sale of the assets of six related publicly traded limited partnerships. After winning the first phase of a multi-phase bench trial, Plaintiffs obtained a $10 million cash settlement for class members.

Hellum v. Prosper Marketplace, Inc., No. CGC-08-482329
The Rosen Law Firm was class counsel in this certified class action in California Superior Court, San Francisco County alleging violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the California Corporations Code in connection with defendants’ offer and sale of unregistered securities.  Plaintiffs settled this action for $10 million in cash.

Friedman v. Quest Energy Partners LP, et al., No. CIV-08-936-M
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel on behalf of purchasers of Quest Resource Corporation’s securities in this consolidated class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements in connection with the Company’s former CEO and CFO misappropriating nearly $10 million. All classes and parties to this litigation settled this action for $10.1 million in cash.

In re Puda Coal Securities Litigation, No. 11-CV-2598 (DLC) (Partial Settlement).
The Rosen Law Firm is currently serving as co-Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleges violations of the Exchange Act and Securities Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements.  The firm secured a $8.7 million certain parties.  The case continues against other defendants

Hufnagle v. RINO International Corporation, No. CV 10-8695-DDP 
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements of revenue and earnings.  The parties settled this action against the company and its auditor for a total of $8,685,000 in cash.

Blitz v. AgFeed Industries, No. 3:11-0992
The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial information. The parties agreed to settle this action for $7 million in cash.

Cole v. Duoyuan Printing, Inc., Case No. 10-CV-7325(GBD)
The Rosen Law Firm was Co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements about the Company’s true financial condition and adequacy of the Company’s internal controls. Plaintiffs and the issuer defendants preliminarily agreed to a partial settlement of $4.3 million cash payment to class members.  Plaintiffs and the underwriters agreed to a separate $1,893,750 cash payment to class members. The total settlement was $6,193,750 in cash.

In re Nature’s Sunshine Products, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 2:06-cv-00267-TS-SA
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Class Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s materially false and misleading statements concerning its financial statements and business practices. Following the certification of the class and extensive discovery, Plaintiffs agreed to settle this case for $6 million in cash.

Miller v. Global Geophysical Services, No. 14-CV-708
The Rosen Law Firm was Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for Southern of Texas.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act arising out a financial restatement.  The parties agreed to settle this case for $5.3 million in cash.

Bensley v. FalconStor Software, Inc., No. 10-CV-4672 (ERK) (CLP) 
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements about the Company’s true financial and business condition.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $5 million in cash.

In re Entropin, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. CV 04-6180-RC
The Rosen Law Firm was counsel to Plaintiff in this securities class action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, and Lead Counsel in the related class action brought in California state court against Entropin, Inc., a defunct pharmaceutical company. These actions alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and violations various state securities laws arising out of allegedly false and misleading statements about the Company’s lead drug candidate Esterom, respectively. On the eve of trial, Defendants agreed to settle these cases for a $4.5 million cash payment to class members.

Fitzpatrick v. Uni-Pixel, Inc., No. 13-CV-01649.  
The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company concealing its true financial condition.  The parties settled this action for $4.5 million consisting of $2.35 million in cash and $2.15 million in stock.

Munoz v. China Expert Technology, Inc., No. 07-CV-10531 (AKH)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of: (a) the Company’s issuance of materially false statements of revenues and earnings; and (b) the Company’s auditors’ issuance of materially false and misleading “clean” audit opinions.  The parties settled this action for $4.2 million cash payment to class members.

Stanger v. China Electric Motor, Inc., No. CV 11-2794-R (AGRx)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleged violations of §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with the Company’s $22.5 million initial public offering.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $3,778,333.33 in cash.

Rose v. Deer Consumer Products, Inc., No. CV11-3701 –DMG (MRWx)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising from the issuance of false statements concerning the Company’s true financial condition.  Plaintiffs settled their claims against Deer and its auditor through two settlements totaling $3.55 million in cash.

In re L&L Energy, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 13-CV-6704 (RA)
The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of false financial statements.  The parties settled this action for $3.5 million in cash.

Sood v. Catalyst Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc., No. 13-CV-23878-UU.
The Rosen Law Firm was sole lead counsel in this class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The complaint alleged that the Company failed to disclose material facts about its primary drug candidate.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $3.5 million in cash. 

Cheung v. Keyuan Petrochemicals, Inc., No. 13-cv-6057 (PAC)
The Rosen Law firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in connection with the Company’s failure to disclose material related party transactions in periodic reports it filed with the SEC.  The parties settled this action for $2.65 million in cash.  Separately, in the related case Omanoff v. Patrizio & Zhao LLC, No. 2:14-cv-723-FSH-JBC, The Rosen Law Firm was sole lead counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.  The complaint alleged that Patrizio & Zhao, LLC, as auditor for Keyuan Petrochemicals, Inc., issued materially false and misleading audit opinions.  The parties have settled this action for $850,000 in cash.  The total recovery for Keyuan investors was $3.5 million.

In re StockerYale, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 1:05-cv-00177
The Rosen Law Firm served as sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b, 20(a) and 20A of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the issuance of allegedly false and misleading press releases regarding certain contracts the Company claimed to have signed. Plaintiffs settled this class action for $3.4 million cash payment to class members.

Mallozzi v. Industrial Enterprises of America, Inc., No. 07-CV-10321 (GBD)
The Rosen Law Firm was Co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements of revenues and earnings. During the pendency of the Company’s bankruptcy, the parties settled this class action for $3.4 million in cash.

Meruelo Capital Partners 2, LLC et al. v. Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc., No. BC 352498
The Rosen Law Firm was co-counsel to plaintiffs in this action brought in California Superior Court, Los Angeles County for violations of the California State securities laws against the securities issuer and broker-dealer in connection with the sale of $2.5 million worth of securities. On the eve of trial, plaintiffs settled the claims against the issuer for a cash payment of $1 million. Following an eight day jury trial, Plaintiffs obtained a jury verdict in their favor and against the underwriter for over $2.2 million (which included prejudgment interest). In sum, plaintiffs recovered over $3.2 million, which represented 100% of plaintiffs’ principal investment of $2.5 million and over $700,000 in prejudgment interest.

Ray v. TierOne Corporation, No. 10CV199
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements of earnings and the Company’s banking operations and business.  The parties settled this action for $3.1 million in cash.

In re Skilled Healthcare Group, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 2:09-CV-5416-DOC (RZx)
The Rosen Law Firm was Co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint alleged violations of the §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements of revenue and earnings. Plaintiffs settled this action for $3 million in cash.

Abrams v. MiMedx Group, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-03074-TWT.
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.  The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of false statements relating the regulatory compliance of its products. The parties settled this action for $2.979 million.

Madden v. Pegasus Communications Corp,  No. 2:05-cv-0568
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The action alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the issuance of allegedly false and misleading statements concerning the Company’s direct broadcast satellite agreement with DirecTV and the Company’s reported subscriber growth and totals. Plaintiffs settled this action for a $2.95 million cash payment to class members.

In re TVIA, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. C-06-06403-RMW
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b, 20(a), 20A of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements by virtue of the Company improper recognition of revenues in violation of GAAP. Plaintiffs settled this action for a $2.85 million cash payment to class members.

Zagami v. Natural Health Trends Corp., et al., No. 3:06-CV-1654-D
The Rosen Law Firm served as sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The complaint alleged violations of § 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements in violation of GAAP. Plaintiffs settled this case for $2.75 million cash payment to class members.

Romero v. Growlife, Inc., No. 2:14-cv-03015-CAS (JEMx)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint
alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising the issuance of false statements concerning the Company’s true financial condition.  The parties agreed to settle this action for total consideration of $2.7 million, comprised of $700,000 in cash and $2 million in stock.

Nguyen v. Radient Pharmaceuticals Corporation, No. CV11-0405-DOC (MLGx)  The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the issuance of false statements concerning the Company’s clinical trial involving its principal product.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $2.5 million in cash.

In re Robert T. Harvey Securities Litigation, No. SA CV-04-0876 DOC (PJWx)
The Rosen Law Firm served as Co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and the related California state court class actions. This action alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the sale of partnership interests that corresponded to the securities of Chaparral Network Storage and AirPrime, Inc., n/.k/a Sierra Wireless, Inc. Plaintiffs settled this and the related state court actions for an aggregate $2.485 million cash payment to class members.

In re China Education Alliance, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. C 10-9239-CAS (JCx)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleges violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements of revenue and earnings.  The parties settled this action for $2.425 million in cash.

Kubala v. SkyPeople Fruit Juice, No. 11-CV-2700 (PKC)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act out of the Company’s failure to disclose material related party transactions that rendered the Company’s financial statements false.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $2.2 million in cash.

In re Fuwei Films Securities Litigation, No. 07-CV-9416 (RJS)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with material misrepresentations in the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus in connection with the Company’s $35 million IPO. The parties settled this action for $2.15 million cash payment to class members.

Rose v. Deer Consumer Products, Inc., No. CV11-3701 –DMG (MRWx) (Partial Settlement)
The Rosen Law Firm is currently serving as sole Lead Counsel in this class action pending in the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California.  The complaint alleges violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising the issuance of false statements concerning the Company’s true financial condition.  The parties agreed to a partial settlement for $2.125 million in cash.  The case is ongoing against Deer’s auditor.

Snellink v. Gulf Resources, Inc., No.CV11-3722-ODW (MRWx)
The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s failure to disclose the related party nature of certain transactions, and the Company’s issuance of false financial statements.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $2.125 million in cash.

Henning v. Orient Paper, Inc., No. CV 10-5887-VBF (AJWx)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleges violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and certain violations of the Securities Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements about the Company’s true financial condition and business prospects.  The parties settled this action for $2 million in cash.

Campton v. Ignite Restaurant Group, Inc., No. 12-CV-2196. 
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.  The complaint alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with material misrepresentations in the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued for the company’s IPO.  The parties agreed to the settle this action for $1.8 million in cash.

Pena v. iBio, Inc., 14-CV-1343-RGA.
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out misstatements and omissions relating to the Company’s purported involvement with an Ebola treatment.  The parties settled this action for $1.875 million in cash.

Hayden v. Wang, et al., No. Civ. 518333
The Rosen Law Firm was sole lead counsel in this class action in the California Superior Court of San Mateo County brought on behalf of purchasers of Worldwide Energy & Manufacturing USA, Inc. common stock in two private placements.  The Complaint alleged that the offering documents were materially false.  The parties settled this action for $1,615,000 in cash.

Burritt v. Nutracea, Inc., No. CV-09-00406-PHX-FJM
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. This action alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Arizona securities laws in connection with the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading statements of earnings and revenues. During the pendency of the Company’s bankruptcy, Plaintiffs settled this action for $1.5 million in cash and a remainder interest of 50% of the issuer’s directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy.

Press v. Delstaff LLC, No. MSC 09-01051
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the California Superior Court for Contra Costa County, brought in connection with a “going private” transaction valued at $1.25/share for the 6.4 million shares implicated in the transaction. The parties settled this action for $1,642,500 in additional compensation to shareholders.

In re Lightinthebox Holding Co., Ltd., 13-CV-6016 (VEC)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company concealing its true financial condition. The parties agreed to settle this action for $1.55 million in cash.

Lee v. Active Power, Inc., No. l:13-cv-00797
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.  The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of false statements relating
to a purported distribution agreement with a major information technology provider.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $1.5 million.

Vandevelde v. China Natural Gas, Inc., No. 10-728-SLR. 
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in the class action pending in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements. Plaintiffs settled this action for $1.5 million in cash.

In re Northfield Laboratories, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 06 C 1493
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s materially false and misleading statements concerning its PolyHeme blood substitute product and business prospects.  Following extensive class discovery and litigation activity in bankruptcy court, the parties agreed to settle this action for $1.5 million in cash.

In re PartsBase.com, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 01-8319
The Rosen Law Firm was Co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The action arose from a $45.5 million initial public offering of common stock by the defendant issuer and a syndicate of underwriters including Roth Capital Partners and PMG Capital Corp. Plaintiffs settled this action for $1.5 million cash settlement for class members.

Guimetla v. Ambow Education Holding Ltd., No. CV-12-5062-PSG (AJWx).
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleged violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in connection with the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $1.5 million.

Simmons v. FAB Universal Corp., No. 13-CV-8216 (RWS)
The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company concealing its true financial condition.  The parties
agreed to settle this action for $1.5 million in cash.

In re Empyrean Bioscience Securities Litigation, No. 1:02CV1439
This class action in which the Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The action alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act based on misrepresentations in defendants’ SEC filings and press releases concerning the clinical testing of the Company’s GEDA Plus microbicide gel. After the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, the parties briefed the issue of whether the securities were traded in an efficient market. Prior to a decision on market efficiency, Plaintiffs settled the case for a $1.4 million payment to class members. 

In re Himax Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. C 07-4891-DDP
The Rosen Law Firm served as Co-Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division.  The complaint alleged violations of §§ 11 and 15 of the Securities Act arising out of the Company’s IPO. Plaintiffs agreed to settle this case for $1.2 million cash payment to class members.

In re Flight Safety Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 3:04-cv-1175
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. The action alleged violations of §§ 10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the defendants alleged failure to disclose material adverse information concerning the Company’s products under development and misrepresenting the amount of time it would take to commercialize the products. Plaintiffs settled the case for a $1.2 million cash payment to class members.

In re: M.H. Meyerson & Co. Securities Litigation, No. 02-CV-2724
This class action, in which the Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel, was filed in U.S. District Court for District of New Jersey. The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act based on allegedly false and misleading SEC filings related to the planned launch of an online brokerage business, and other material misrepresentations, which allegedly inflated the price of Meyerson stock during the class period. Plaintiffs settled the case for a $1.2 million payment to class members.

Ansell v. National Lampoon, Inc., No. CV10-9292-PA (AGRx)
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of a market manipulation scheme involving National Lampoon’s common stock.  The parties agreed to settle this action for $1 million in cash.

In re OPUS360 Corp. Securities Litigation, No. 01-Civ-2938
The Rosen Law Firm was Co-Lead Counsel for this action brought in the Southern District of New York alleging violations of the federal securities laws arising from a $75.0 million initial public offering of common stock by the defendant issuer and a syndicate of underwriters including JP Morgan and Robertson Stephens, Inc. The Court certified the action as a class action and approved a final settlement.

Fouladian v. Busybox.com, Inc., No. BC 248048
The Rosen Law Firm was Co-Lead Counsel in this class action brought in California Superior Court, Los Angeles County.  The action arose from a $12.8 million initial public offering of securities by the defendant issuer and underwriter. California and federal securities laws claims (Cal. Corp. Code §25401 and §11 of 1933 Act) were brought on behalf of a nationwide class of public offering investors. The Court approved a $1.0 million cash settlement to a nationwide class of investors.

Howard v. Chanticleer Holdings, Inc., No. 12-CV-81123-JIC
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.  The complaint alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with material misrepresentations in the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued for the Company’s public offering of common stock and warrants.  The parties have agreed to settle this action for $850,000 in cash.

Singh v. Tri-Tech Holding, Inc., No. 13-CV-9031 (KMW).  The Rosen
Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court
for Southern District of New York.  The complaint alleged violations of §10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company concealing its true financial condition. The parties settled this action for $975,000 in cash.

Katz v. China Century Dragon Media, Inc., No. CV 11-02769 JAK (SSx)
The Rosen Law Firm is currently serving as sole Lead Counsel in this class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.  The complaint alleges violations of §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements.  Following entry of default against the issuer and certification of the class, the non-issuer defendants and Plaintiffs have preliminarily agreed to resolve the claims against the non-issuer defendants for $778,333.33, subject to court approval.

Gianoukas v. Tullio and Riiska, No. 02CC18223
The Rosen Law Firm was lead counsel to a group of twenty-one plaintiffs that brought claims of fraud and negligent misrepresentation in California Superior Court, Orange County against the former Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officers of a publicly traded software company, NQL Inc. The complaint alleged that the officers issued a series of false and misleading press releases concerning the business of NQL for the purpose of inducing the purchase and retention of NQL securities. Plaintiffs settled the action favorably for a confidential amount.

In re China Intelligent Lighting and Electronics, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 2:11-CV-02768 PSG (SSx).
The Rosen Law Firm was co-Lead Counsel in this consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint alleged violations of §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading
financial statements.  The parties agreed to partially settle this action for $631,600 in cash.  A default judgment was obtained against the issuer.

The BoxLot Company v. InfoSpace, Inc., No. GIC 779231
The Rosen Law Firm was plaintiff’s counsel for this action filed in California Superior Court, San Diego County which arose from the aborted merger agreement and ultimate sale of The BoxLot Company’s assets to InfoSpace. The action alleged violations of California securities laws (Cal. Corp. Code §25400 & §25401) and common laws and sought damages of $92.8 million from InfoSpace and its CEO, Naveen Jain. The case settled favorably for plaintiffs for a confidential amount.

Teague v. Alternate Energy Holdings, Inc., No. 10-CV-634-BLW
The Rosen Law Firm was sole Lead Counsel in this class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho.  The complaint alleged violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s issuance of materially false and misleading financial statements and business condition.  The parties settled this action for $450,000.

Huttenstine v. Mast, No. 4:05-cv-152 F(3)
The Rosen Law Firm is currently serving as sole Lead Counsel in this class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The complaint alleges violations of §§10b and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s material misstatements and omissions concerning the nature of certain sales contracts it had entered into. Plaintiffs have preliminarily agreed to settle this action this action for $425,000 cash payment to class members.

Kinzinger v. Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc., No. 03-0922608
The Rosen Law Firm served as sole Lead Counsel in this class action filed in Utah state court alleged violations of the Utah Securities Act against Paradigm Medical arising out of false and misleading statements made to investors in a $5.0 million private placement of securities. The court approved a $625,000 settlement on behalf of the private placement purchasers.