Mar 10, 2022 | Shareholder Investigations
MoneyLion Stockholders – Securities Investigation on Behalf of MoneyLion Investors – MoneyLion Shareholders With Losses Greater Than $25,000 Encouraged To Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating whether MoneyLion, Inc. (“MoneyLion” or the “Company”) (NYSE: ML) violated federal securities laws.
MONEYLION INVESTORS WHO HAVE SUFFERED FINANCIAL LOSSES GREATER THAN $25,000 ARE ENCOURAGED TO CLICK HERE TO ACCESS KEHOE LAW FIRM’S SECURITIES CLASS ACTION QUESTIONNAIRE TO PROVIDE DETAILS ABOUT THEIR MONEYLION SECURITIES.
On March 10, 2022, MoneyLion reported, among other things, that “. . . management has noted errors related to operating expenses, net loss and basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share in the condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2021 and additional paid-in capital and retained earnings in the condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2021, along with related impacts to the condensed consolidated statement of cash flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2021 and the condensed consolidated statements of redeemable convertible preferred stock, redeemable noncontrolling interests and stockholders’ deficit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2021.”
The Company also stated that “[r]elatedly, any press releases, earnings releases, investor presentations or other communications describing the Company’s Original Financial Statements for the Affected Period should no longer be relied upon.”
On this news, during intraday trading on March 10, 2022, MoneyLion’s stock price dropped significantly.
Mar 9, 2022 | Data Breach
Norwood Clinic Reports Data Breach Affecting 228,103 Individuals
Norwood Clinic, “a large multispecialty medical group practicing in Alabama,” has reported that a forensics investigation revealed that an unauthorized party gained access to Norwood Clinic’s servers that stored patient information.
Based on Norwood Clinic’s investigation, the unauthorized party may have had access to name, contact information, date of birth, Social Security number, Driver’s License number, limited health information, and/or health insurance policy number. The information, according to the company’s data breach notification did not include any individual’s financial account information, debit or credit card numbers.
For more information about the Norwood Clinic data breach, please CLICK HERE.
Source: Office of The Maine Attorney General, Data Breach Notifications.
Have You Been Harmed As A Result Of A Data Breach Which Has Exposed Your Private Personal, Protected Health Or Personally Identifiable Information?
If you have experienced actual or attempted harm or been the victim of fraud due to the illegal or unauthorized exposure of your private personal, protected health or personally identifiable information, please contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., [email protected], for a free, confidential consultation and no-obligation evaluation of potential legal claims.
Mar 9, 2022 | Car Problems Car Complaints
BMW Recalling Potentially 917,106 Vehicles – An Electrical Short Can Cause the PCV Heater to Overheat, Increasing the Risk of a Fire While Driving or Soon After Driving When Parked.
BMW of North America, LLC (“BMW”) is recalling certain 2008-2013 1 Series Coupe (128i); 2007-2013 3 Series Coupe (328i, 328xi, 328i xDrive); 2007-2010 X3 SAV (X3 3.0si, X3 xDrive30i); 2008-2013 1 Series Convertible (128i); 2006-2011 3 Series Sedan (325i, 325xi, 328i, 328xi, 328i xDrive, 330i, 330xi); 2006-2012 3 Series Wagon (328i, 328i xDrive); 2007-2013 3 Series Convertible (328i); 2006-2010 5 Series Sedan (525i, 525xi, 528i, 528xi, 530i, 530xi); 2006-2007 5 Series Wagon (530xi); 2007-2010 X5 SAV (X5 3.0si, X5 xDrive30i); 2006-2008 Z4 Coupe (Z4 3.0si); and 2006-2011 Z4 Roadster (Z4 3.0i, Z4 3.0si, Z4 sDrive30i) vehicles. The heater for the positive crankcase ventilation (“PCV”) valve may short circuit.
For more information about this recall, which potentially affects 917,106 BMW vehicles, please click NHTSA Campaign Number 22V119000.
How Do You Know If Your Vehicle Has Been Recalled?
Your vehicle MAY be involved in a safety recall which MAY create a safety risk for you or your passengers. If not repaired, a potential safety defect could lead to injury or even death. Safety defects must be repaired by a dealer at no cost to you. To find out if your vehicle is included in the recall, please use the NHTSA’s VIN Look-up Tool.
What Is A Vehicle Recall?
When a manufacturer or the NHTSA determines that a vehicle creates an unreasonable risk to safety or fails to meet minimum safety standards, the manufacturer is required to fix that vehicle at no cost to the owner. The fix, or repair, can be accomplished by repairing, replacing, offering a refund (for equipment) or, in rare cases, repurchasing the car/vehicle.
What Should I Do If My Vehicle Is Included In This Recall?
If your vehicle is included in a specific recall, it is very important that you get it fixed as soon as possible given the potential danger to you and your passengers if it is not addressed. You should receive a separate letter in the mail from the vehicle manufacturer, notifying you of the recall and explaining when the remedy will be available, whom to contact to repair your vehicle, and to remind you that the repair will be done at no charge to you. If you believe your vehicle is included in the recall, but you do not receive a letter in the mail from the vehicle manufacturer, please call NHTSA’s Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236, or contact your vehicle manufacturer or dealership.
For additional information about vehicle recalls, please click Vehicle Recall FAQs.
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
VEHICLE OWNERS AND LESSEES AFFECTED BY AUTOMOTIVE DEFECTS OR SAFETY RECALLS ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT KEHOE LAW FIRM, P.C., [email protected], FOR A FREE, CONFIDENTIAL CONSULTATION AND NO-OBLIGATION EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL LEGAL CLAIMS.
Mar 8, 2022 | Antitrust
American Bankers Association, FactSet Research Systems Inc. & S&P Global Inc. Subject of Antitrust Class Action Alleging Monopolistic Conduct, Conspiracy to Restrain Trade
You may have legal claims, if you are a data user in the U.S. that entered subscription agreements for CUSIP number licensing fees and paid those licensing fees directly to S&P’s (and now FactSet’s) CUSIP Global Services (“CGS”) division between March 7, 2018 through March 7, 2022 (the “Class Period”).
On March 7, 2022, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against the American Bankers Association (“ABA”), FactSet Research Systems Inc. (“FactSet”), and S&P Global, Inc. (“S&P).
According to the class action complaint, the antitrust lawsuit stems from S&P’s abuse of its monopoly power in the financial instruments identification market, and the Defendants’ conspiracy to maintain S&P’s (and now FactSet’s) monopoly power and unreasonably restrain trade in the financial instruments identification market, in order to extract artificially inflated payments from investors and other users of financial data through subscription agreements to access CUSIP numbers.
Plaintiff and other class members, according to the complaint, receive no financial data services from Defendants. Instead, they obtain financial data from other sources that necessarily include CUSIP numbers. Defendants, allegedly, can hold up Plaintiff and members of the Class to pay prices unilaterally determined by the Defendants, not because there is anything special or valuable about the string of numbers and letters they generate, but merely because CUSIPs have been designated as the standard.
Additionally, the Defendants, allegedly, have conspired to prevent competition from, and the implementation of, alternative free, or far more cost-friendly financial instrument identifiers of equal or superior efficiency and quality.
The class action complaint alleges that the Defendants extract the subscription fees through unfair, deceptive, and threatening business practices throughout the United States, including by threatening to cut off investors’ access to data, typically provided by third parties (e.g., Bloomberg) that is essential to the continuation of investors’ businesses. Further, S&P, through its CGS division, breached its commitment to the Accredited Standards Committee X9 to offer market participants, such as the Plaintiff and Class members, fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) pricing for CUSIPs.
Allegedly, the Defendants conspired to maintain and perpetuate S&P’s financial instruments identifier monopoly and unreasonably restrain trade to collect substantial and unreasonable licensing fees (shared by S&P and ABA), which are not connected to the value of any particular CUSIP. According to the complaint, they can only charge these fees due to S&P’s monopoly power by virtue of CUSIP being the standard.
According to the complaint, S&P generates revenue for licensing the right to CUSIPs, which it shares with the ABA in at least three ways.
First, S&P charges securities issuers a fee (usually about $280 per CUSIP number) to obtain CUSIP numbers for its securities. Second, S&P charges data providers (e.g., Bloomberg) licensing fees for using CUSIPs in its databases. Third, and more recently, S&P demands that data providers’ end users, such as the Plaintiff, or entities that otherwise download CUSIP numbers as part of financial data for their own use (“data users”), enter their own subscription agreements with S&P under the threat of stripping the CUSIP numbers from their data feeds if the unilaterally determined licensing fee is not paid. Defendants, according to the complaint, have a clear interest in requiring that all data users use only the CUSIP identifier system, because, upon information and belief, the ABA retains 30% of CGS’s licensing fees from all data users with the remainder kept by S&P (and now FactSet).
If you are a data user in the U.S. that entered subscription agreements for CUSIP number licensing fees and paid those licensing fees directly to S&P’s (and now FactSet’s) CUSIP Global Services (“CGS”) division between March 7, 2018 through March 7, 2022 (the “Class Period”), you are encouraged to contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], [email protected], for a free, confidential consultation and no-obligation evaluation of potential legal claims.
Mar 7, 2022 | Shareholder Investigations
Rivian Stockholders Encouraged to Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. Purchasers of Rivian Securities Pursuant to the Company’s IPO in November 2021 May Have Legal Claims.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating whether Rivian Automotive, Inc. (“Rivian” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: RIVN) violated federal securities laws.
IF YOU PURCHASED RIVIAN STOCK PURSUANT OR TRACEABLE TO THE COMPANY’S INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING (“IPO”) ON NOVEMBER 10, 2021 AND SUFFERED LOSSES, PLEASE CLICK HERE TO ACCESS KEHOE LAW FIRM’S SECURITIES CLASS ACTION QUESTIONNAIRE TO PROVIDE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR RIVIAN SECURITIES.
On March 7, 2022, a securities class action lawsuit was filed against Rivian and other defendants in United States District Court, Central District of California. According to the class action complaint, the Registration Statement and Prospectus used to effectuate Rivian’s IPO contained untrue statements of material fact, and omitted information necessary to make the statements made therein not misleading, as well as omitted material facts required to be stated therein.
According to the complaint, the Registration Statement misled investors with respect to the potential for significant reputational damage and cancellation of fully refundable preorders for its R1T and R1S Electric Vehicles due to the Company’s need to address its underpriced Electric Vehicles by raising prices shortly after the IPO.
Rivian investors who purchased, or otherwise acquired, their Rivian securities pursuant or traceable to the Company’s November 2021 IPO are encouraged to contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], [email protected], for a free, confidential consultation and no-obligation evaluation of potential legal claims.
