Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Recent Cases
The action alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose that: (1) China Med’s acquisition of Bio-Ekon Biotechnology Co. Ltd. was from a third-party seller connected to the Company’s own chairman; (2) China Med overpaid by an estimated $20 million in the acquisition of BBE; (3) China Med’s transaction to acquire BBE involved the Company’s use of fraudulent shell companies, including Finnea International Limited which never owned BBE; (4) according to SAIC filings, BBE actually suffered operating losses prior to China Med’s acquisition; and (5) the Company has spent twice as much on “investing activities” as it has purportedly generated from operations.
On December 6, 2011, Glaucus Research Group released a report focusing on the Company’s fraudulent acquisition of BBE and initiating a strong sell for China Med. On this shocking news, China Med shares plunged roughly 23% at the end of trading on December 6, 2011.
If you purchased China Med securities and would like to discuss your legal rights, visit www.faruqilaw.com/CMED. You can also contact us by calling Richard Gonnello or Francis McConville toll free at 877-247-4292 or at 212-983-9330 or by sending an e-mail to rgonnello@faruqilaw.com or fmcconville@faruqilaw.com. Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding China Medical’s conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.
Related listings
-
Court delays border-crossing pollution rule
Recent Cases 01/03/2012A federal court Friday put on hold a controversial Obama administration regulation aimed at reducing power plant pollution in 27 states that contributes to unhealthy air downwind. More than a dozen electric power companies, municipal power plant oper...
-
Chief justice defends court's impartiality
Recent Cases 01/02/2012Chief Justice John Roberts said Saturday that he has "complete confidence" in his colleagues' ability to step away from cases where their personal interests are at stake, and noted that judges should not be swayed by "partisan demands." The comment, ...
-
Court delays border-crossing pollution rule
Recent Cases 01/01/2012A federal court Friday put on hold a controversial Obama administration regulation aimed at reducing power plant pollution in 27 states that contributes to unhealthy air downwind. More than a dozen electric power companies, municipal power plant oper...
What Is Meant by ‘No-Fault’ Workers’ Compensation in Illinois?
If you were injured in a work-related accident and have been researching workers’ compensation, you may have seen it described as a “no-fault” system. One of the most important things to understand about the workers’ compensation system in Illinois is that it is based on a “no-fault” system. What does this mean, exactly?
Most employers in Illinois are required by law to have workers’ compensation insurance. And the workers' compensation in Illinois is a “no-fault” system, which means that any worker who has been hurt on the job is entitled to workers' compensation benefits. If you have been hurt on the job, you are entitled to workers’ compensation benefits no matter whose fault the accident was.
A no-fault insurance system, such as workers’ comp, works by paying claims regardless of who is to blame for an accident. This provides an important layer of protection for injured workers, sparing them from having to through additional litigation and the through the additional burden of proving who was at fault before receiving benefits.
In Illinois, even though you don’t have to prove that your injury was your employer’s fault, you do have to prove that your injury happened at work or as a result of work. If you would like help to file your workers' compensation claim, Krol, Bongiorno, & Given’s experienced workers' comp lawyers are here to help. With over 60 years of combined legal experience, the KBG law firm is a leader in the field of workers’ compensation law and we have earned the reputation as aggressive advocates for injured workers before the IWCC.