NEW YORK, Jan. 24, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that class action lawsuits have commenced on behalf of shareholders of the following publicly-traded companies. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the deadlines listed to petition the court and further details about the cases can be found at the links provided. There is no cost or obligation to you.
Danske Bank A/S (OTCMKTS: DNKEY) Class Period: Purchasers of American Depositary Receipts between January 9, 2014 and October 23, 2018 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 11, 2019 Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/danske-bank-a-s-loss-form?wire=3
The lawsuit alleges: Danske Bank A/S made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Danske Bank’s Estonian branch was facilitating money laundering through at least March 2016; (ii) that a whistleblower had reported the Estonian money laundering to the Company in 2013; (iii) that Denmark’s Financial Supervisory Authority (the “DFSA”) had been investigating the Estonian money laundering since 2014; (iv) that Danske Bank had concealed the results of its own internal investigation from the DFSA, further exposing it to regulatory action and fines; (v) that Danske Bank had been overstating its historical profits by including the profits derived from its illicit Estonian operations; and (vi) that Danske Bank lacked effective internal and reporting controls.
To learn more about the Danske Bank A/S class action contact jlevi@levikorsinsky.com .
Sogou Inc. (NYSE: SOGO) Class Period: Purchasers of American Depositary Shares pursuant and/or traceable to Sogou's false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company's initial public offering on November 9, 2017 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 11, 2019 Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/sogou-inc-loss-form?wire=3
The lawsuit alleges: Sogou Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements throughout the class period and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Chinese regulators were analyzing Sogou for regulatory action because of an increase in Sogou merchants’ sales of counterfeit goods; (ii) Chinese regulators were analyzing Sogou for regulatory action because Sogou’s existing software, advertising procedures, personnel, and audit procedures were insufficient to safeguard against compliance violations with governing Chinese regulations, and would need to be updated, enhanced, and strengthened, thus resulting in increased expenses; (iii) Sogou’s cost of revenues were skyrocketing primarily because of significant increases in Traffic Acquisition Cost, which is a primary driver of Sogou’s cost of revenues, as Sogou was dealing with significant price inflation from increased competition; (iv) Sogou was going to alter its strategy concerning smart hardware and push the Company’s AI capabilities to increase product competitiveness; (v) as a result of altering its smart hardware strategy, Sogou had already decided to phase out non-AI-enabled hardware products, such as legacy models of Teemo Smart Watch, and transition to use products integrating AI technologies, which Sogou hoped would reduce its hardware revenue in the second half of 2018; and (vi) as a result of the foregoing, Sogou’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
To learn more about the Sogou Inc. class action contact jlevi@levikorsinsky.com .
Micron Technology Inc. (NASDAQGS: MU) Class Period: June 22, 2018 - November 19, 2018 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 25, 2019 Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/micron-technology...orm?wire=3
The lawsuit alleges that, during the class period, Micron Technology Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Chinese State Administration for Market Regulation notified Micron it was investigating dynamic random-access memory (“DRAM”) chip providers in China for potential collusion and other anti-competitive conduct; (2) Chinese investigators had found “massive evidence” of Micron’s anti-competitive behavior; (3) Micron had engaged in a price-fixing conspiracy with Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix; and (4) as a result, Micron’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
To learn more about the Micron Technology Inc. class action contact jlevi@levikorsinsky.com .
You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn’t require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Levi & Korsinsky is a national firm with offices in New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm’s attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Levi & Korsinsky, LLP Joseph E. Levi, Esq. 55 Broadway, 10th Floor New York, NY 10006 jlevi@levikorsinsky.com Tel: (212) 363-7500 Toll Free: (877) 363-5972 Fax: (212) 363-7171 www.zlk.com
