Oct 15, 2021 | Filed Securities Cases
InnovAge Holding Corp. (NASDAQ: INNV), Class Period 03.05.2021-09.21.2021, Lead Plaintiff Deadline 12.13.2021.
Class action filed on October 14, 2021 in United States District Court, District Of Colorado, on behalf of persons and entities that purchased, or otherwise acquired, InnovAge common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus (collectively, the “Registration Statement”) issued in connection with the Company’s March 2021 initial public offering (“IPO”). Plaintiff pursues claims against the Defendants under the Securities Act of 1933.
Class action complaint alleges that the the Registration Statement was materially false and misleading and omitted to state that (1) certain of InnovAge’s facilities failed to provide covered services, provide accessible and adequate services, manage participants’ medical situations, and oversee use of specialists; (2) as a result, the Company was reasonably likely to be subject to regulatory scrutiny, including by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; (3) as a result, there as a significant risk that CMS would suspend new enrollments pending an audit of the Company’s services; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, the InnovAge Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
Investors who purchased, or otherwise acquired, INNV securities during the Class Period and suffered financial losses are encouraged to contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., by completing Kehoe Law Firm’s Securities Class Action Questionnaire or by contacting either Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], or John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected].
Lightning eMotors (NYSE: ZEV), Class Period 05.07.2021-08.16.2021
Federal securities class action filed on October 15, 2021 in United States District Court, District of Colorado, on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other than the Lightning eMotors Defendants that purchased, or otherwise acquired, Lightning eMotors securities between May 7, 2021 and August 16, 2021, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants’ violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.
Throughout the Class Period, according to the complaint, the Lightning eMotors Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and compliance policies. Specifically, the Lightning eMotors Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that (i) the Company would record a substantially greater net loss per share in the second quarter of 2021 compared to the second quarter of 2020 and would pull its full year guidance for the remainder of 2021; (ii) accordingly, the Company materially overstated its financial position and/or prospects; and (iii) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
Investors who purchased, or otherwise acquired, ZEV securities during the Class Period and suffered financial losses are encouraged to contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., by completing Kehoe Law Firm’s Securities Class Action Questionnaire or by contacting either Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], or John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected].
Oct 13, 2021 | Overtime & Wages
Important Things Employees Should Know About The Minimum Wage, Overtime Pay, And The Fair Labor Standards Act
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making employees aware that the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) establishes minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and youth employment standards affecting employees in the private sector and in federal, state, and local governments.
Covered nonexempt workers are entitled to a minimum wage of not less than $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009. Overtime pay at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay is required after 40 hours of work in a workweek.
The federal minimum wage provisions are contained in the FLSA. The federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009. Many states also have minimum wage laws. Some state laws provide greater employee protections; employers must comply with both.
The FLSA does not provide wage payment collection procedures for an employee’s usual or promised wages or commissions in excess of those required by the FLSA. However, some states do have laws under which such claims (sometimes including fringe benefits) may be filed.
Covered, nonexempt workers are entitled to a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009. Special provisions apply to workers in American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Nonexempt workers must be paid overtime pay at a rate of not less than one and one-half times their regular rates of pay after 40 hours of work in a workweek.
Wages required by the FLSA are due on the regular payday for the pay period covered. Deductions made from wages for such items as cash or merchandise shortages, employer-required uniforms, and tools of the trade, are not legal to the extent that they reduce the wages of employees below the minimum rate required by the FLSA or reduce the amount of overtime pay due under the FLSA.
The FLSA contains some exemptions from these basic standards. Some apply to specific types of businesses; others apply to specific kinds of work.
While the FLSA does set basic minimum wage and overtime pay standards and regulates the employment of minors, there are a number of employment practices which the FLSA does not regulate.
For example, the FLSA does not require:
- vacation, holiday, severance, or sick pay;
- meal or rest periods, holidays off, or vacations;
- premium pay for weekend or holiday work;
- pay raises or fringe benefits; or
- a discharge notice, reason for discharge, or immediate payment of final wages to terminated employees.
The FLSA does not provide wage payment or collection procedures for an employee’s usual or promised wages or commissions in excess of those required by the FLSA. However, some States do have laws under which such claims (sometimes including fringe benefits) may be filed.
Also, the FLSA does not limit the number of hours in a day or days in a week an employee may be required or scheduled to work, including overtime hours, if the employee is at least 16 years old.
The above matters are for agreement between the employer and the employees or their authorized representatives.
All employees of certain enterprises having workers engaged in interstate commerce, producing goods for interstate commerce, or handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that have been moved in or produced for such commerce by any person, are covered by the FLSA.
A covered enterprise is the related activities performed through unified operation or common control by any person or persons for a common business purpose and —
- whose annual gross volume of sales made or business done is not less than $500,000 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level that are separately stated); or
- is engaged in the operation of a hospital, an institution primarily engaged in the care of the sick, the aged, or the mentally ill who reside on the premises; a school for mentally or physically disabled or gifted children; a preschool, an elementary or secondary school, or an institution of higher education (whether operated for profit or not for profit); or
- is an activity of a public agency.
Any enterprise that was covered by the FLSA on March 31, 1990, and that ceased to be covered because of the revised $500,000 test, continues to be subject to the overtime pay, child labor and recordkeeping provisions of the FLSA.
Employees of firms which are not covered enterprises under the FLSA still may be subject to its minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and child labor provisions if they are individually engaged in interstate commerce or in the production of goods for interstate commerce, or in any closely-related process or occupation directly essential to such production.
Such employees include those who work in communications or transportation; regularly use the mails, telephones, or telegraph for interstate communication, or keep records of interstate transactions; handle, ship, or receive goods moving in interstate commerce; regularly cross State lines in the course of employment; or work for independent employers who contract to do clerical, custodial, maintenance, or other work for firms engaged in interstate commerce or in the production of goods for interstate commerce.
Domestic service workers such as day workers, housekeepers, chauffeurs, cooks, or full-time babysitters are covered if:
- their cash wages from one employer in calendar year 2010 are at least $1,700 (this calendar year threshold is adjusted by the Social Security Administration each year); or
- they work a total of more than 8 hours a week for one or more employers.
Tipped employees are individuals engaged in occupations in which they customarily and regularly receive more than $30 a month in tips. The employer may consider tips as part of wages, but the employer must pay at least $2.13 an hour in direct wages.
The employer who elects to use the tip credit provision must inform the employee in advance and must be able to show that the employee receives at least the applicable minimum wage (see above) when direct wages and the tip credit allowance are combined. If an employee’s tips combined with the employer’s direct wages of at least $2.13 an hour do not equal the minimum hourly wage, the employer must make up the difference. Also, employees must retain all of their tips, except to the extent that they participate in a valid tip pooling or sharing arrangement.
The federal overtime provisions are contained in the FLSA. Unless exempt, employees covered by the FLSA must receive overtime pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek at a rate not less than time and one-half their regular rates of pay. There is no limit in the FLSA on the number of hours employees aged 16 and older may work in any workweek. The FLSA does not require overtime pay for work on Saturdays, Sundays, holidays, or regular days of rest, unless overtime is worked on such days.
The FLSA applies on a workweek basis. An employee’s workweek is a fixed and regularly recurring period of 168 hours — seven consecutive 24-hour periods. It need not coincide with the calendar week, but may begin on any day and at any hour of the day. Different workweeks may be established for different employees or groups of employees. Averaging of hours over two or more weeks is not permitted. Normally, overtime pay earned in a particular workweek must be paid on the regular pay day for the pay period in which the wages were earned.
On May 20, 2020, the Department of Labor announced a final rule that allows employers to pay bonuses or other incentive based pay to salaried, nonexempt employees whose hours vary from week to week. The final rule clarifies that payments in addition to the fixed salary are compatible with the use of the fluctuating workweek method under the FLSA. For more information, see www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/fww.
On May 18, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor announced a final rule to withdraw the partial lists of establishments that lack or may have a “retail concept” under the FLSA. For more information, click www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/2020-7i.
On December 12, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor announced a Final Rule that will allow employers to more easily offer perks and benefits to their employees. For more information, click www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/2019-regular-rate.
On September 24, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor announced a final rule to make 1.3 million American workers eligible for overtime pay. For more information, click www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime2019/index.
Overtime must be paid at a rate of at least one and one-half times the employee’s regular rate of pay for each hour worked in a workweek in excess of the maximum allowable in a given type of employment. Generally, the regular rate includes all payments made by the employer to or on behalf of the employee (except for certain statutory exclusions). The following examples are based on a maximum 40-hour workweek applicable to most covered nonexempt employees.
- Hourly rate (regular pay rate for an employee paid by the hour) – If more than 40 hours are worked, at least one and one-half times the regular rate for each hour over 40 is due. Example: An employee paid $8.00 an hour works 44 hours in a workweek. The employee is entitled to at least one and one-half times $8.00, or $12.00, for each hour over 40. Pay for the week would be $320 for the first 40 hours, plus $48.00 for the four hours of overtime – a total of $368.00.
- Piece rate – The regular rate of pay for an employee paid on a piecework basis is obtained by dividing the total weekly earnings by the total number of hours worked in that week. The employee is entitled to an additional one-half times this regular rate for each hour over 40, plus the full piecework earnings. Example: An employee paid on a piecework basis works 45 hours in a week and earns $405. The regular rate of pay for that week is $405 divided by 45, or $9.00 an hour. In addition to the straight-time pay, the employee is also entitled to $4.50 (half the regular rate) for each hour over 40 – an additional $22.50 for the 5 overtime hours – for a total of $427.50.Another way to compensate pieceworkers for overtime, if agreed to before the work is performed, is to pay one and one-half times the piece rate for each piece produced during the overtime hours. The piece rate must be the one actually paid during nonovertime hours and must be enough to yield at least the minimum wage per hour.
- Salary – The regular rate for an employee paid a salary for a regular or specified number of hours a week is obtained by dividing the salary by the number of hours for which the salary is intended to compensate. The employee is entitled to an additional one-half times this regular rate for each hour over 40, plus the salary.
If, under the employment agreement, a salary sufficient to meet the minimum wage requirement in every workweek is paid as straight time for whatever number of hours are worked in a workweek, the regular rate is obtained by dividing the salary by the number of hours worked each week.
To illustrate, suppose an employee’s hours of work vary each week and the agreement with the employer is that the employee will be paid $480 a week for whatever number of hours of work are required. Under this agreement, the regular rate will vary in overtime weeks. If the employee works 50 hours, the regular rate is $9.60 ($480 divided by 50 hours). In addition to the salary, half the regular rate, or $4.80, is due for each of the 10 overtime hours, for a total of $528 for the week. If the employee works 60 hours, the regular rate is $8.00 ($480 divided by 60 hours). In that case, an additional $4.00 is due for each of the 20 overtime hours for a total of $560 for the week.
In no case may the regular rate be less than the minimum wage required by the FLSA.
If a salary is paid on other than a weekly basis, the weekly pay must be determined in order to compute the regular rate and overtime pay. If the salary is for a half month, it must be multiplied by 24 and the product divided by 52 weeks to get the weekly equivalent. A monthly salary should be multiplied by 12 and the product divided by 52.
Source: U.S. Department Of Labor, Wage and Hour Division (Last accessed 10.13.2021)
Oct 13, 2021 | Filed Securities Cases
Purchasers Of Vipshop Holdings American Depositary Shares Between March 22, 2021 And March 29, 2021 Are Encouraged To Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating whether Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (“Goldman Sachs”) and Morgan Stanley (“Morgan Stanley”) violated federal securities laws.
On October 12, 2021, a class action lawsuit was filed against Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, based, according to the complaint, on the alleged, unlawful use of material non-public information by Defendants Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
According to the class action complaint, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley “avoided billions in losses” by selling shares of Vipshop Holdings Ltd. (“Vipshop”) (NYSE: VIPS) to the Plaintiff and other unsuspecting public shareholders, after confidentially learning that Archegos Capital Management, a family office with $10 billion under management, failed (or was likely to fail) to meet a margin call, requiring it to fully liquidate its position in Vipshop.
INVESTORS OF VIPSHOP HOLDINGS WHO PURCHASED, OR OTHERWISE ACQUIRED, THE COMPANY’S AMERICAN DEPOSITARY SHARES BETWEEN MARCH 22, 2021 AND MARCH 29, 2021 (THE “CLASS PERIOD”) WHO WISH TO DISCUSS KEHOE LAW FIRM’S SECURITIES CLASS ACTION INVESTIGATION OR HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT POTENTIAL LEGAL CLAIMS ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT EITHER JOHN KEHOE, ESQ., (215) 792-6676, EXT. 801, [email protected], OR MICHAEL YARNOFF, ESQ., (215) 792-6676, EXT. 804, [email protected], [email protected].
Oct 12, 2021 | Filed Securities Cases
Class Action Filed On Behalf Of Faraday Future Investors Who Acquired Their Securities Between January 28, 2021 And November 15, 2021, Both Dates Inclusive
On December 23, 2021, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Central District of California, on behalf of persons and entities that purchased, or otherwise acquired, the securities of Faraday Future Intelligent Electric Inc. (“Faraday Future” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: FFIE) between January 28, 2021 and November 15, 2021, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”).
The class action lawsuit is pursuing claims against the Faraday Future Defendants under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. According to the class action complaint, throughout the Class Period, the Faraday Future Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Faraday Future Defendants failed to disclose to investors that (1) the Company had assets in China frozen by courts, (2) a significant percentage of its deposits for future deliveries were attributable to a single undisclosed affiliate; (3) the Company’s cars were not as close to production as the Company claimed; (4) that, as a result of previously issued statements that were misleading and/or inaccurate, Faraday Future could not timely file its quarterly report; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
As a result of the Farady Future Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company’s securities, Plaintiff and other class members, according to the complaint. have suffered significant losses and damages.
Faraday Future investors should be aware that J Capital Research recently issued a report, “Move Over Lordstown: There’s a New EV Scam in Town,” which, among other things stated that “[J Capital Research doesn’t] think Faraday Future (FFIE), an EV SPAC, will ever sell a car. So far, it’s nothing but a bucket to collect money from U.S. investors and pour it into the black hole of debt created by its founder, China’s best-known securities fraudster, Jia Yueting.”
The research report also stated that “[a]fter eight years in business, FFIE has failed to deliver a car and is yet again saying ‘next year.’ The company has reneged on promises to build factories in five localities in the U.S. and China and repeatedly delayed the sixth. FFIE is being sued by dozens of unpaid suppliers and has failed to disclose that assets in China have been frozen by courts. And Jia appears to be running the company behind the scenes.”
Additionally, J Capital Research reported that “[g]iven the current bubble environment, FFIE nevertheless managed to raise about $1 bln from U.S. investors via PIPEs and SPAC merger in July. Now it promises to restart its abandoned factory in Hanford, California and mass-produce cars in just seven months. [J Capital Resarch] doubt[s] that timeline will hold: three recent visits to the factory showed little activity, and company formers told us there are still engineering problems to work out.”
On November 15, 2021, Faraday Future filed a Form 8-K which stated that “. . . the Company will be unable to timely file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the third quarter ended September 30, 2021 or its amended Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-258993) and (ii) certain business and operational updates from the third quarter of 2021.”
Faraday Future’s stock has declined since its November 15, 2021 closing price and was down more than 6% during intraday trading on November 24, 2021.
FARADAY FUTURE INVESTORS WHO ACQUIRED THEIR SECURITIES DURING THE CLASS PERIOD AND SUFFERED FINANCIAL LOSSES ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT JOHN KEHOE, ESQ., (215) 792-6676, EXT. 801, [email protected], OR MICHAEL YARNOFF, ESQ., (215) 792-6676, EXT. 804, [email protected], [email protected], TO DISCUSS THE FARADAY FUTURE SECURITIES CLASS INVESTIGATION OR POTENTIAL LEGAL CLAIMS.
Oct 11, 2021 | Shareholder Investigations
EHTH INVESTOR ALERT – Investors Who Have Held eHealth, Inc. Stock Continuously Since At Least March 2018 Are Encouraged To Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating whether certain officers and/or directors of eHealth, Inc. (“eHealth” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: EHTH) breached their fiduciary duties to eHealth and the Company’s shareholders.
The investigation concerns whether eHealth made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts to investors regarding, among other things, eHealth’s previously alleged highly-aggressive accounting and modeling assumptions; eHealth’s skyrocketing rate of member churn, resulting from eHealth’s pursuit of low-quality, loss-making growth; and its reliance on direct response television advertising, which attracts an unprofitable, high churn enrollee.
IF YOU HAVE HELD EHEALTH STOCK CONTINUOUSLY SINCE AT LEAST MARCH 2018 AND WISH TO DISCUSS KEHOE LAW FIRM’S INVESTIGATION OR POTENTIAL LEGAL CLAIMS, PLEASE CONTACT MICHAEL YARNOFF, ESQ., (215) 792-6676, EXT. 804, [email protected], [email protected].
