Jul 16, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
On July 5, 2017, The National Law Review reported that “. . . a federal court in New York gave final approval to a $32.5 million class action settlement alleging racial discrimination against African-American employees of MetLife.”
According to the article, “$32.5 million class action settlement in MetLife race discrimination case,” the plaintiffs of the class action lawsuit:
. . . alleged that MetLife discriminated against African-American Financial Services Representatives by hindering their ability to get lucrative accounts, team up with colleagues, and receive training opportunities.
These types of discriminatory barriers are often associated with glass ceiling discrimination, in which high-level employees are unfairly passed over for promotions because of their race, gender, or other protected characteristic.
The National Law Review also reported that
. . . the class size appears to be about 700 people. In particular, the settlement covers African-American or Black Financial Services Representatives who worked for MetLife or New England Life Insurance Co. between May 15, 2011 and July 1, 2016.
On July 4, 2017, BigClassAction.com published a story, “$32.5M MetLife Race Bias Class Action Settlement Approved,” which reported:
The lawsuit was filed in May 2015 by lead plaintiff Marcus Creighton, who was a MetLife employee in Illinois from 2001 to October 2014. Creighton alleged the company was in violation of federal civil rights law by discriminating against [African-American] brokers. Specifically, the suit alleged that MetLife provided very few opportunities for its African American financial services representatives to work with their non-[African-American] colleagues, that it restricted their training opportunities, and prevented them from getting good accounts.
BigClassAction.com also reported:
According to the lawsuit, MetLife lets its financial services representatives form teams with colleagues and combine their client accounts, but “almost entirely exclude[s]” [African-American] financial services representatives from favorable teaming relationships. The complaint also alleged the company steers the most lucrative business opportunities away from [African-American] brokers and denies them equal access to its “Delivering the Promise” training program. This systematic discrimination leads the company to pay [African-American] financial services representatives less than their non[African-American] peers, the lawsuit alleged.
The settlement fund will pay $75,000 to Creighton and $50,000 to six other workers who joined the case as named plaintiffs in an amended complaint filed in April 2016.
On July 12, 2017, Insurance Business reported (“Judge approves MetLife’s $32.5 million race bias class action settlement”) that:
. . . former employees are expected to receive funds from the settlement, and they will be able to choose between two different payment methods, Bloomberg Law reported. On one hand, they can opt to be paid based on their years in the industry, and their time spent with MetLife or its subsidiary, New England Life Insurance. Alternatively, they can opt for a longer process that considers the supposed discrimination an ex-employee faced personally and how it may have harmed his or her career or reputation.
The class action lawsuit is Creighton, et al. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, No. 15-CV-08321 (S.D.N.Y.).
About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated. Together, the partners of the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Jul 13, 2017 | Securities Class Action Archive
Amec Foster Wheeler plc – Investigation on Behalf of Investors
Kehoe Law Firm’s securities attorneys are investigating potential claims on behalf of investors of Amec Foster Wheeler plc (NASDAQ:AMFW) involving possible securities law violations.
On July 11, 2017, Amec Foster Wheeler disclosed that it was being investigated by the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office for “past use of third parties and possible bribery and corruption and related offenses.”
Following this news, Amec Foster Wheeler’s share price fell by 4.57% on July 11, 2017. The company’s shares fell an additional 2.3% on July 12, 2017, causing significant harm to investors.
Amec Foster Wheeler Investigated by The Serious Fraud Office
As reported on July 11, 2017 in The Telegraph:
Amec Foster Wheeler is being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office over its dealings with Unaoil over possible bribery and corruption through payments to middlemen.
The energy support services group rushed out a regulatory announcement on Tuesday evening confirming the formal launch of a probe by the watchdog.
In May the company signalled it could be in the SFO’s sights in documents relating to its £2.2bn merger with peer Wood Group.
Circulars detailing risks to deal revealed that a Wood Group business “engaged Unaoil and that the joint venture made payments to Unaoil under agency agreements”.
Agency agreements are widely understood to mean payments to third parties which can be used to pay bribes, though there is no indication that this happened with Wood’s joint venture.
The Telegraph also reported:
Unaoil is at the centre of a global corruption scandal with allegations that it paid bribes to secure deals. Petrofac has already been dragged into the scandal with its executives questioned by the SFO, though the company has said previously it has not found any evidence of wrongdoing.
Wood Group has said it [is] conducting an internal investigation into its dealings with Unaoil and relevant local regulators and prosecutors had been informed.
In the merger documents it said it had not “confirmed that the payments made… to Unaoil were used by Unaoil in ways that would amount to bribery, corruption or money laundering offences, or that there was any involvement in or knowledge of bribery, corruption or money laundering offences on the part of Wood Group companies, the joint venture or their personnel”.
If the investigations turn into full-scale prosecutions they could result in heavy fines which could deal a huge blow to the merged Amec-Wood business. . . .
Have You Purchased or Acquired Shares of Amec Foster Wheeler?
If you purchased or acquired shares of Amec Foster Wheeler and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn more about the investigation and your potential legal rights, please fill out the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Jul 12, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Ocular Therapeutix Class Action Lawsuit
As previously posted, a class action lawsuit has been filed against Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. (“Ocular”) (NASDAQ: OCUL) and certain of its officers and directors for violations of the federal securities laws.
The class action lawsuit, brought on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Ocular securities between May 5, 2017 through July 6, 2017, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleges that throughout the Class Period, the defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Ocular Therapeutix’s management has been misleading investors about DEXTENZA manufacturing issues, including that more than 50% of lots manufactured by Ocular Therapeutix contain bad product; (2) such manufacturing issues could imperil the approval of DEXTENZA by the FDA; and (3) as a result, defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
The lawsuit seeks to recover damages for Ocular Therapeutix investors under the federal securities laws.
Seeking Alpha Reports: “Ocular: A Poke In The Eye”
On Jul 6, 2017, near the close of trading, Seeking Alpha published an article, “Ocular: A Poke In The Eye,” which reported that Ocular’s Dextenza is
- . . . unlikely to get approved by the FDA on July 19 PDUFA date.
- Management has been misleading investors about manufacturing.
- OCUL’s hydrogel technology is worthless at the moment.
According to Seeking Alpha, OCUL “. . . had a lot of potential. Unfortunately, [however,] management has failed to execute and brought the company to the brink of collapse. It is not suprising . . . that the ENTIRE senior management has resigned recently (CFO, CMO and CEO).”
Further, Seeking Alpha reported that
OCUL has disclosed that they received a second 483 from the FDA after their facility re-inspection. Even a layperson . . . can tell that the company is having serious manufacturing issues, and their whole approach to manufacturing and patient safety is highly questionable. What’s more troubling is that either management doesn’t fully understand the letter, or they have been misleading investors. Both are bad. [The second 483 can be read by clicking here: OCUL_Second_483].
Manufacturing Issues & Dextenza
OCUL, according to Seeking Alpha,
. . . has disclosed that they received a second 483 from the FDA after their facility re-inspection. Even a layperson reading this can tell that the company is having serious manufacturing issues, and their whole approach to manufacturing and patient safety is highly questionable. What’s more troubling is that either management doesn’t fully understand the letter, or they have been misleading investors. Both are bad.
Further, Seeking Alpha reported:
First, OCUL has REPEAT observations. Not only did they not resolve prior issues, but have committed worse transgressions. [The first 483 can be read by clicking here: OCUL_483].
Observation 6 reads: “Laboratory controls do not include the establishment of scientifically sound and appropriate test procedures designed to assure that drug products conform to appropriate standards of identity, strength, quality and purity.”
Observation 5 of the second 483 reads: “Laboratory controls do not include the establishment of scientifically sound and appropriate specifications and test procedures designed to assure that drug products conform to appropriate standards of identity, strength, quality and purity.” Sounds familiar?
Observation 3 of the second 483 reads: “There are no written procedures for production and process controls designed to assure that the drug products have the identity, strength, quality, and purity they purport or are represented to possess. Specifically, your firm lacks documentation to show that your product can consistently meet specifications as you have not systemically evaluated the [redacted] lots manufactured from FEB2016 to present, of which [redacted] failed specification and were disposed of in-process[. . . .]”
In plain English, this means, OCUL still doesn’t know to make their product consistently. How does OCUL deal with instances when product doesn’t meet specifications? They have been discarding bad manufacturing lots without investigation.
Second, OCUL has characterized their manufacturing as “in a fully developed mode.” Well, Observation 1 of the second 483 reads: “Particulate matter has been noted in 10/23 lots (intended use clinical, R&D, stability, etc.) manufactured from FEB2016 to date. The remaining [redacted] lots were scrapped prior to the visual inspection therefore their particulate status remains unknown.”
In plain English, this means that more than 50% of lots manufactured by OCUL contain bad product. That leaves plenty of room for additional development. Sometimes, OCUL has had to discard entire lots because they were out of spec!!
Third, if OCUL only discarded bad product without investigation, that would be a bad thing. But in fact, they have been using bad product in clinical trials and have released some into their commercial supply!
Following this news, Ocular’s share price fell 6% on July 6, 2017, and plummeted an additional 25% on July 7, 2017 to $7.12, causing significant harm to investors.
Then, on July 11, 2017, Ocular Therapeutix announced that it received a Complete Response Letter from the FDA denying Ocular’s resubmission of a New Drug Application for Dextenza. According to the company, the FDA’s letter referenced deficiencies in manufacturing processes and analytical testing discovered in the May 2017 inspection. This news sent the share price tumbling in after-hours trading by more than 30%.
Do You Have Ocular Therapeutix Losses?
If you purchased or otherwise acquired shares in Ocular Therapeutix and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn more about the investigation, fill out the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Jul 11, 2017 | Securities Class Action Archive
Akari Therapeutics – Class Action Filed
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Akari Therapeutics Plc (“Akari”) (NASDAQ: AKTX) and certain of its officers, on behalf of shareholders who purchased Akari securities between March 30, 2017 and May 11, 2017, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”).
This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Akari’s Alleged False and/or Misleading Phase 2 PNH Trial of Coversin Statements
The class action lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Akari made materially false and/or misleading statements, and/or failed to disclose that: its Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Gur Roshwalb, and possibly other executives, were involved in publishing false information about Akari, including the Phase 2 PNH trial of Coversin; that Akari lacked sufficient checks and protections to prevent such behavior; and that as a result of the above, Akari’s statements about its business, operations, and prospects were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
Akari’s CEO Placed On Administrative Leave
On May 11, 2017, Akari announced that Dr. Roshwalb was placed on administrative leave while the Board of Directors reviews whether Dr. Roshwalb and other executives were involved in a materially inaccurate research report that was released and subsequently withdrawn on April 26, 2017 by Edison Investment Research Ltd. When this information reached the public, Akari’s stock price lowered materially, which harmed investors according to the Complaint.
What If I Have Akari Therapeutics Investment Losses?
If you purchased or otherwise acquired shares in Akari Therapeutics and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn more information about this investigation, please complete the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Jul 10, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Replacement Worker, Strike Worker, Lockout Worker or Picketing Worker?
If so, the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating whether Replacement Workers, Strike Workers, Lockout Workers or Picketing Workers have been improperly compensated under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and applicable state wage laws.
Replacement Worker, Strike Worker, Lockout Worker & Picketing Worker Overtime Investigation
The investigation concerns, among other things, whether temporary replacement workers (also referred to as strike workers, lockout workers, and picketing workers) were paid the full and legally mandated overtime premium for hours worked over forty (40) during the workweek, as well as whether employees who “worked off the clock” received overtime pay at a rate not less than one and a half (1½) times the regular rate at which they are employed, as required by the FLSA for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek.
Possible examples of overtime work include, but are not limited to, traveling to and from work in company sponsored vehicles/vans, putting on and removing employer-required uniforms or personal protective equipment (“PPE”) before and after a shift started and ended, and/or working through an allowed lunch or other break.
The investigation also focuses on whether employers kept proper records to sufficiently determine a replacement, strike, lockout, or picketing worker’s wages, hours, and other conditions of employment.
What Can Replacement Workers, Strike Workers, Lockout Workers or Picketing Workers Do If They Believe They Have Been Improperly Compensated?
If any of the examples listed above apply/applied to your work situation, and you would like to explore your rights or potential legal options, please contact our Firm. We would welcome the opportunity to review your circumstances and answer any questions you may have – at no cost or obligation to you. For additional information, please contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected] or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”)
According to the United States Department of Labor, the basic requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act are payment of the minimum wage, overtime pay for time worked over 40 hours in a workweek, restrictions on the employment of children, and recordkeeping. More information in this regard can be found on the Fair Labor Standards Act Advisor web page.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
