Apr 7, 2020 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
FTC Cautions To Watch For Scammers and Fraudsters Pretending To Be From The Social Security Administration Trying To Obtain Social Security Numbers Or Money
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. wants people to know that the FTC has advised individuals to watch for scammers pretending to be from the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) in an effort to illegally obtain one’s Social Security number or money.
Importantly, the FTC wants you to know the following:
- Do not trust caller ID. Scam calls may show up on caller ID as the Social Security Administration and look like the agency’s real number, but it’s not the SSA calling.
- Your Social Security number is not about to be suspended, and your bank accounts are not about to be seized.
- DO NOT verify your Social Security number or any other personal information to anyone who calls out of the blue. If you already did, visit IdentityTheft.gov/SSA to find out what steps you can take to protect your credit and your identity.
- SSA will never call to threaten your benefits or tell you to wire money, send cash, or put money on gift cards. Anyone who tells you to do those things is a scammer.
- Talk about it with friends and family. If you’re getting these calls, chances are your friends and family also are getting called.
- People who know about scams are much less likely to fall for them. Thus, by discussing them, you are helping protect people you care for and people in your community.
Click video for more information on Social Security scams.
Source: Federal Trade Commission – FTC.gov
Apr 7, 2020 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Collective Action Complaint Filed Against Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC, d/b/a Pei Wei Asian Kitchen, On Behalf Of General Managers Allegedly Misclassified as Exempt From FLSA’s Overtime Provisions
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making employees aware that on April 6, 2020, a collective action complaint was filed in United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, against Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC, d/b/a Pei Wei Asian Kitchen (“Pei Wei”), on behalf of Plaintiff and other similarly situated current and former General Managers of Pei Wei who, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), are, allegedly, entitled to unpaid wages from Defendant Pei Wei for overtime work for which they did not receive overtime premium pay.
Acording to the collective action complaint, Defendant Wei “classified Plaintiff and all other similarly situated current and former General Managers as exempt from the FLSA’s overtime provisions,” and “willfully violated the FLSA by failing to pay Plaintiff and all other similarly situated current and former General Managers overtime wages as required by law during the Collective Period.”
The complaint alleges that “[p]ursuant to Defendant’s policy, pattern, or practice of not paying overtime wages to [Plaintiff] and all other similarly situated current and former General Managers when they worked beyond 40 hours in a workweek, [Plaintiff] and all other similarly situated current and former General Managers regularly performed work without receiving overtime compensation.”
Additionally, it is alleged that “[r]ather than pay Plaintiff and all other similarly situated current and former General Managers one and one-half times their regular hourly rate of pay for all hours worked over forty (40) in a given workweek, Defendant [Pei Wei] misclassified Plaintiff and all other similarly situated current and former General Managers as exempt from overtime pay, and did not compensate them for their overtime hours worked.”
Do You Believe Your Wage and Hour or Overtime Pay Rights Have Been Violated?
If you believe your wage and hour or overtime pay rights have been violated please either contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. Partner Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], complete the form on the right or send an e-mail to [email protected] for a free, no-obligation case evaluation of your facts to determine whether your wage and hour or overtime rights have been violated and whether there is a basis for a class action lawsuit.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. prosecutes wage and hour class actions on a contingent-fee basis; thus, plaintiffs and the class members do not pay out-of-pocket attorney’s fees or litigation costs. Subject to court approval, attorney’s fees and litigation costs are derived from the recovery obtained for the class.
Apr 7, 2020 | Securities Class Action Archive
Shareholder Derivative Action Filed Seeking To Remedy Alleged Wrongdoing Committed by Adamas Pharmaceuticals’ Directors and Officers From August 8, 2017 Through September 30, 2019 – Investors of Adamas Pharmaceuticals Encouraged to Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making investors aware that on April 6, 2020, a verified shareholder derivative complaint was filed in United States District, Northern District of California, seeking to remedy alleged wrongdoing committed by Adamas Pharmaceuticals’ (“Adamas” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: ADMS) directors and officers from August 8, 2017 through September 30, 2019 (the “Relevant Period”).
According to the shareholder derivative complaint, during the Relevant Period, the Individual Adamas Defendants breached their fiduciary duties by personally making and/or causing the Company to make to the investing public a series of materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Individual Adamas Defendants willfully or recklessly made and/or allowed certain of the Individual Adamas Defendants to make false and misleading statements to the investing public that failed to disclose, inter alia, that: (1) health insurers and other payors were by and large providing limited or no coverage of GOCOVRI, or were imposing burdensome requirements that limited patients’ access to GOCOVRI; (2) as payors began to indicate their positions on GOCOVRI, the number of physicians prescribing GOCOVRI would decrease precipitously; (3) as a result of the foregoing, GOCOVRI’s sales, market penetration, and market share would be severely impacted in the long run; and (4) the Company failed to maintain internal controls. As a result of the foregoing, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
Adamas investors who currently own ADMS shares are encouraged to contact either Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], [email protected], or John Kehoe, Esq, (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected], to discuss the Adamas Pharmaceuticals investigation or potential legal claims.
Apr 7, 2020 | Securities Class Action Archive
Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Tufin Software Technologies Ltd. On Behalf of Investors Who Purchased, or Otherwise Acquired, TUFN Securities Pursuant And/Or Traceable to The Registration Statement and Related Prospectus Issued In Connection With Tufin Software’s April 2019 IPO – TUFN Investors Who Suffered Losses Encouraged to Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making investors aware that on April 6, 2020, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Central District of California, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Tufin Software Technologies Lts. (“Tufin Software” or the “Company”) (NYSE: TUFN) pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and related prospectus (collectively, the “Registration Statement”) issued in connection with Tufin Software’s April 2019 initial public offering (“IPO”), seeking to recover compensable damages caused by the Tufin Software Defendants’ alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933.
According to the complaint, the Tufin Software Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, because they misrepresented and failed to disclose adverse facts pertaining to the Company’s business, operational and financial results, which were known to the Tufin Software Defendants or recklessly disregarded by them. Specifically, the Tufin Software Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Tufin Software’s customer relationships and growth metrics were overstated, particularly with respect to North America; (2) Tufin Software’s business was deteriorating, primarily in North America; (3) as a result, Tufin Software’s representations regarding its sustainable financial prospects were overly optimistic; and (4) as a result, the Offering Documents were materially false and/or misleading and failed to state information required to be stated therein.
Tufin Software investors who purchased, or otherwise acquired, TUFN securities pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and related prospectus issued in connection with Tufin Software’s April 2019 IPO are encouraged to contact either Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], [email protected], or John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected], to discuss the class action lawsuit or potential legal claims.
Apr 6, 2020 | Securities Class Action Archive
Federal Securities Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Gossamer Bio, Inc. – GOSS Investors Who Suffered Losses Encouraged to Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making Gossamer Bio, Inc. (“Gossamer” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: GOSS) investors aware that on April 3, 2020, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Southern District of California, against Gossamer on behalf of all investors who purchased, or otherwise acquired, Gossamer common stock between February 8, 2019 and December 13, 2020, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), and/or who acquired Gossamer shares pursuant or traceable to Gossamer’s Registration Statement and Prospectus in connection with its February 8, 2019 Initial Public Offering (“IPO”), seeking to recover damages caused by the Gossamer Defendants’ alleged violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under §§11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and under §§10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the SEC, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5.
According to the class action complaint:
Gossamer is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on discovering, acquiring, developing, and commercializing therapeutics in the disease areas of immunology, inflammation, and oncology. The Company’s lead drug, GB001, is an oral antagonist of prostaglandin D2 receptor 2, or DP2, in development for the treatment of moderate-to-severe eosinophilic asthma and other allergic conditions. Gossamer’s GB001 product is in Phase 2 development for asthma and rhinosinusitis.
In the IPO, Gossamer and the underwriters sold 19,837,500 shares of common stock at an initial public offering price of $16.00 per share, for a total offering price of $317.4 million. Proceeds to the Company, net of underwriting discounts and commissions, were $256.68 million. Defendants in this action consist of Gossamer, Gossamer executives and directors who signed the Registration Statement, and the underwriters to the IPO (collectively, ‘Defendants’).
In violation of the 1933 Act, Defendants [allegedly] issued untrue statements of material facts and omitted to state material facts required to be stated from the Registration Statement and accompanying and incorporated offering materials that Gossamer filed with the SEC in support of the IPO. Specifically, Defendants misrepresented, inter alia, that: (1) a separate, 248-patient Phase 2 trial showed that neither GB001 nor asthma treatment montelukast had met the primary endpoint for improvement in asthma symptoms because of ‘study design and execution issues related to patient selection, including adherence’; and (2) that Novartis, who had a product that would compete against GB001 in the works, had a successful Phase 2 trial that had clinically validated DP2 antagonism. [Emphasis added.]
Additionally, the complaint alleges that
[i]n the materials accompanying the IPO and 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 compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose to investors: (1) the reasons for Gossamer’s GB001 trial failures; (2) the purported clinical validation of Novartis’ oral DP2 antagonist; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
In October 2019, Novartis announced that its fevipiprant product had failed to improve long function in two Phase 3 trials, as measured by FEV1, over placebo.
On December 16, 2019, Novartis announced that it was terminating the development of its DP2 antagonist fevipiprant for asthma after it failed another pair of Phase 3 clinical trials.
Analysts noted that ‘[w]hen Gossamer raised $276 million in an IPO earlier in [2019], it said Novartis’ fevipiprant phase 2 had clinically validated DP2 antagonism. That statement now looks premature, particularly when viewed in light of the failures of other DP2 drugs.’[]
On this news, the stock plummeted from a December 13, 2019 closing price of $25.37 per share to $15.96 per share, a one day drop of $9.41 or over 37%. [Emphasis in original and added.]
Gossamer investors who purchased, or otherwise acquired, GOSS securities during the Class Period and/or pursuant or traceable to Gossamer’s Registration Statement and Prospectus in connection with its February 8, 2019 IPO and suffered losses are encouraged to contact either Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], [email protected], or John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected], to discuss the class action lawsuit or potential legal claims.
