All Recently Filed Cases

Blue Apron Holdings Inc

The lawsuit alleges that Blue Apron violated the Securities Act of 1933 because the Registration Statement for the Company's IPO which was launced on June 28, 2017 failed to disclose that: (1) rather than continue to significantly increase spending on advertising, Blue Apron had already decided to significantly reduce spending on advertising in Q2 2017, which would hurt sales and profit margins in future quarters; (2) that Blue Apron was already experiencing adverse on-time in-full rates, meaning orders were not arriving on time or with all the ingredients needed, which was hurting customer retention; and (3) that the Company had run into delays in Q2 2017 with its new factory in Linden, New Jersey.

Subsequent to the IPO, Blue Apron’s stock declined immediately, declining below $5 per share less than two months after the IPO -- a decline of 50% from the IPO price.

If you wish to join the litigation or discuss your interests in this lawsuit, contact Frank A. Bottini of Bottini & Bottini at (858) 914-2001 or fab@bottinilaw.com.

Sanchez Energy Corp.

Shareholder Derivative Action

Bottini & Bottini represents shareholders of Sanchez Energy Corp. in a shareholder derivative action pending in Delaware Chancery Court. The case alleges that the officers and directors of Sanchez Energy engaged in self-dealing and breached their fiduciary duties by engaging in transactions that benefitted themselves at the expense of the Company and its shareholders.

The...

Pacific Gas and Electric Corp

Shareholder derivative case

Bottini & Bottini is counsel for the Plaintiff in a shareholder derivative action involving Pacific Gas & Electric Corp in federal court in San Francisco. The case seeks to recover damages on PG&E's behalf and against current and former officers and directors of the Company. The complaint alleges that PG&E Corp. suffered millions of dollars of damages due to the defendants'...

ZTO Express (Cayman) Inc

Securities Class Action

San Diego, California, August 15, 2017. Bottini & Bottini, Inc., a law firm specializing in securities class action litigation, announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock of ZTO Express (Cayman), Inc. (NYSE: “ZTO”) pursuant to the Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s initial public offering (“IPO”). The lawsuit—pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York —seeks to recover damages under the federal securities laws for those who purchased or otherwise acquired ZTO Express’ stock pursuant or traceable to its October 27, 2016 IPO.

Purchasers of ZTO Express securities who wish to serve as lead plaintiff in this lawsuit must apply to the court for lead-plaintiff appointment no later than October 16, 2017. If you purchased ZTO Express’ stock in connection with its IPO and suffered losses, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Frank A. Bottini, Esq., of Bottini & Bottini, at (858) 914-2001 or fab@bottinilaw.com, to discuss your rights and interests in this lawsuit. You can also go to Bottini & Bottini’s website (http://www.bottinilaw.com) for more information.

The lawsuit charges that ZTO, certain of its directors and officers, and underwriters of its IPO violated Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933. Defendants priced ZTO’s IPO shares at $19.50 per share. Through the IPO, defendants issued and sold over 72 million ADSs, generating over $1.36 billion for defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the IPO Registration Statement and Prospectus contained materially false and misleading information, and failed to disclose that that ZTO was improperly inflating its stated profit margins by keeping certain low-margin segments of its business out of its financial statements. ZTO failed to disclose that it used a system of “network partners” to handle lower-margin pickup and delivery services, while maintaining ownership of core hub operations. By keeping the “network partners” businesses off its own books, the Company allegedly was able to exaggerate its profit margins to investors.

Subsequent to the IPO, ZTO Express’ stock declined immediately. As of August 11, 2017, the stock was trading at just $13.25 – a decline of over 32% from the IPO price. If you wish to join the litigation or discuss your interests in this lawsuit, contact Frank A. Bottini of Bottini & Bottini at (858) 914-2001 or fab@bottinilaw.com.

Alibaba

Shareholder class action

Bottini & Bottini is a member of Plaintiffs' Executive Committee in this securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Alibaba American Depository Shares (“ADS”) pursuant or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus (collectively, the “Registration Statement”) issued in connection with Alibaba’s September 2014 initial public stock...

Yahoo Inc.

Shareholder lawsuit

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. and Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy LLP have filed two shareholder lawsuits alleging claims related to the sale of Yahoo's operating assets to Verizon Inc. After entering into the agreement with Verizon in July 2016, Yahoo subsequently disclosed that “senior executives” and legal staff knew about a massive data breach back in 2014 – one of the largest in U.S. history...

Tesla Inc.

Shareholder lawsuit

Bottini & Bottini has filed a shareholder lawsuit against Tesla's directors in federal court in Delaware, alleging damages to Tesla and its shareholders related to the SolarCity acquisition. The lawsuit alleges that Tesla procured shareholder approval for the SolarCity acquisition by filing a false and misleading Proxy Statement with the SEC, and that the acquisition was primarily aimed...

Castlight Health Inc.

Securities Class Action

In re Castlight Health Inc. Shareholder Litig., Case No. CIV533203 (Superior Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara). Bottini & Bottini was a member of the Executive Committee in this shareholder class action asserting claims under Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933. The complaint alleged that the Registration Statement and Prospectus for the Company’s March 14, 2014 IPO were false and misleading. Recently, the case settled for $9.50 million. Judge Marie Seth Weiner, Chair of the Complex Litigation Department, approved the Settlement and entered Final Judgment on October 28, 2016.

Model N

Securities Class Action

Plymouth County Retirement System v. Model N, Inc., Case No. CIV530291 (Superior Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara). Bottini & Bottini was one of three counsel for Plaintiffs in the case, which was brought in Santa Clara, California and alleged claims under Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933. The complaint alleged that the Registration Statement and Prospectus for the Company’s March 23, 2013 IPO were false and misleading. Recently, the case settled for $8.55 million. Judge Marie Seth Weiner, Chair of the Complex Litigation Department, approved the Settlement and entered Final Judgment on April 4, 2016.

Apple Computer Inc.

Shareholder Derivative Action

Bottini & Bottini is lead counsel for Plaintiff in Klein v. Apple Computer, Case No. 5:14-cv-03634-EJD, a shareholder derivative litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Judge Davila, presiding). The complaint seeks damages caused to Apple when Steve Jobs and Apple's other directors adopted and implemented unlawful "anti-poaching"...

Express Scripts

Shareholder Derivative Action

On August 4, 2016, Bottini & Bottini filed a shareholder derivative action in St. Louis state court on behalf of Express Scripts, Inc. The claims asserted in the complaint are alleged against the Company’s Board of Directors as well as certain of the Company’s officers, including Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) George Paz, President, Timothy Wentworth, Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”),...

Terraform Global

Securities Class Action

This is a securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased the Company’s Class A common stock in or traceable to the Company’s July 31, 2015 initial public offering (the “IPO”), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933 (“1933 Act”) against TerraForm Global, certain of the Company’s officers and directors, SunEdison, Inc. (“SunEdison”) and the investment banks that underwrote the IPO.

The Offering Materials were materially false and misleading when made and/or failed to disclose that (i) SunEdison had suffered a quarterly loss of $0.93 per share for the quarter ended June 30, 2015, a loss significantly greater than analysts’ consensus estimate, which would call into question TerraForm Global’s business plan and growth strategy; (ii) SunEdison’s poor performance would negatively impact TerraForm Global and SunEdison would be unable to support TerraForm Global in the manner described in the Offering Materials; (iii) SunEdison would stop contributing significant operating assets to TerraForm Global for all of 2016, substantially hindering the Company’s ability to grow its asset portfolio; (iv) SunEdison would not acquire Latin America Power because it could not or would not fulfill its obligations to make a $400 million upfront payment under the acquisition contract; and (v) TerraForm Global would not be able to increase its dividend distributions by 20% CAGR on a $1.10 initial annualized run rate for the three years following the IPO, and such dividend distributions and purported growth rate had no reasonable basis.

BOFI Holding Inc.

Shareholder Derivative Action

By Order dated June 9, 2016, the Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California appointed Bottini & Bottini as Lead Counsel over four related shareholder derivative actions brought on behalf of Bofi Holding, Inc.

Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint on August 26, 2016. The Amended Complaint alleges that due to the...

GoPro Inc.

Securities Class Action

SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA. BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC. (http://www.bottinilaw.com) has commenced a class action on behalf of individuals and institutional investors who purchased GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) stock in connection with the Company's June 26, 2014 IPO. By Order dated June 7, 2016, the Court appointed Bottini & Bottini as Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs. The claims are asserted on behalf on person who bought GoPro stock between June 26, 2014 and November 19, 2014. The class action lawsuit alleges that GoPro, its underwriters, and certain of its officers violated the federal securities laws by issuing false or misleading statements in — or omitting material information from — the registration statement issued in connection with GoPro’s initial public offering (“IPO”) on June 26, 2014.

GoPro commenced the IPO on June 26, 2014, selling approximately 17.8 million shares of common stock at $24 per share. In less than a week, the price of GoPro shares rose more than 100% to $48 per share, and eventually reached $98.47 on October 7, 2014.

The lawsuit alleges that the registration statements issued in connection with the IPO contained false or misleading statements, or failed to disclose material information that was required to be disclosed under the federal securities laws.

On October 7, 2016, Bottini & Bottini filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint, a copy of which can be viewed above.

GoPro shareholders who purchased GoPro shares between June 26, 2014 and November 19, 2014 have important legal rights and may have a claim for damages related to the purchase of their GoPro stock.

For further information about your potential legal rights and remedies, contact Yury A. Kolesnikov, Esq. at Bottini & Bottini, Inc. by e-mailing ykolesnikov@bottinilaw.com or calling (858) 914-2001.

Wells Fargo and Company

Shareholder Derivative Action

On September 30, 2016, Bottini & Bottini filed a shareholder derivative action in San Francisco against various current and former officers and directors of Wells Fargo & Company. The complaint alleges that the officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties and violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and engaged in insider trading in violation of the...

Vale S.A.

Securities Class Action

On January 28, 2016, Bottini & Bottini, Inc. filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of Vale S.A. (NYSE:VALE; VALE/P) securities from November 7, 2013 through November 30, 2015, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit, which is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeks to recover damages for Vale investors under the federal securities laws.

Purchasers of Vale securities who wish to serve as lead plaintiff in this lawsuit must apply to the court for lead-plaintiff appointment no later than February 5, 2016. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff or to discuss your rights or interests in this lawsuit, please contact plaintiff's counsel, Albert Y. Chang, Esq. of Bottini & Bottini, Inc., at (858) 914-2001 or achang@bottinilaw.com. You can also go to Bottini & Bottini, Inc.'s website at http://www.bottinilaw.com for more information.

The complaint charges Vale and certain of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Vale is a Brazilian mining and metals company. Samarco Minera áo S.A. ("Samarco") is a joint venture mining company between Vale and BHP Billiton plc of Australia ("BHP") with facilities in the Brazilian states of Mina Gerais and Espírito Santo. Samarco has three dams — the Fundao Dam, the Santarem Dam, and the Germano Dam — that are used to hold back waste or by-product (also known as tailings) left over from mining. In May 2015, Vale securities were downgraded by prominent ratings agencies, which warned that Vale's ratings outlook could worsen if Vale was not able to reduce its costs. Then, on November 5, 2015, the Fundao Dam burst, contaminating the Rio Doce, a major river in the area, with mud and toxic waste. Several people were killed in the accident, many more went missing, and hundreds were displaced.

The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants issued false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose to investors that contrary to defendants' statement that the tailings from the Fundao Dam were "not dangerous and [would] not react with any other substances," the waste that was spilled as a result of the accident at the Fundao Dam was toxic. In addition, the complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose that Vale had a contract with Samarco that allowed Vale to deposit iron-ore waste from its treatment plants at its Alegria mine into the Fundao Dam, and that Vale's procedures for the mitigation of environmental, health and safety incidents were inadequate. As a result of defendants' false statements and/or omissions, Vale securities traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, with the price of its common stock ADRs reaching over $16.00 per ADR and preferred stock ADRs reaching over $15.00 per ADR. When the true details entered the market beginning in May 2015, however, the price of Vale's ADRs began to decline. The complaint asserts that Vale investors suffered damages.

If you wish to join the litigation or discuss your rights or interests in this lawsuit, please contact Albert Y. Chang, Esq. of Bottini & Bottini, Inc. at (858) 914-2001 or achang@bottinilaw.com.

A10 Networks Inc.

Shareholder derivative lawsuit

On June 24, 2015, Bottini & Bottini filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit on behalf of A10 Networks, Inc. in Santa Clara, California County Superior Court. The complaint alleges that, during the Relevant Period (April 2012 to the present), the Individual Defendants caused the Company to infringe patents and intellectual property held by Foundry Networks, which was subsequently acquired...

Envivio

Shareholder class action

Bottini & Bottini filed a shareholder class action on Nov. 22, 2013 in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Mateo on behalf of shareholders who bought stock in Envivio traceable to the Company's April 24, 2012 IPO.
After surviving defendants' demurrers, certifying the class, and engaging in substantial discovery, the case was settled for $8.5 million in January...

Marrone Bio Innovations

Shareholder derivative lawsuit

On October 14, 2015, Bottini & Bottini filed a complaint in California state court against officers and directors of Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc. and its auditor (Ernst & Young), alleging breaches of fiduciary duty and accounting malpractice related to false financial statements issued by Marrone. The Company has admitted that the financial statements were false and that the Company...

Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.

Securities Class Action

Bottini & Bottini is a member of Plaintiffs' Executive Committee in this securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Alibaba American Depository Shares (“ADS”) pursuant or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus (collectively, the “Registration Statement”) issued in connection with Alibaba’s September 2014 initial public stock offering (the “IPO” or “Offering”).
The action asserts strict liability claims under §§ 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (“1933 Act” or “Securities Act”) against Alibaba, certain Alibaba officers and directors, and the underwriters of the IPO.
Alibaba is a Chinese e-commerce company that provides consumer-to-consumer, business-to-consumer and business-to-business sales services via web portals. The Company also provides electronic payment services, a shopping search engine and data-centric cloud computing services. The group began in 1999 when Jack Ma founded the website Alibaba.com, a business-to-business portal to connect Chinese manufacturers with overseas buyers. In 2012, two of Alibaba’s portals handled 1.1 trillion yuan ($170 billion) in sales. The company primarily operates in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and on the date of its IPO, Alibaba's market value was $231 billion. However, the market cap was $145 billion at the end of September 2015. In September 2014, Alibaba launched its IPO and issued approximately 368 million ADS at a price of $68 per share, all pursuant to the Registration Statement.
The Registration Statement contained material omissions as well as untrue statements of material fact. The Registration Statement failed to disclose that Alibaba executives had met with China’s State Administration of Industry and Commerce (“SAIC”) in July 2014, just two months before the IPO in the United States, and that regulators had then notified Alibaba of a variety of illegal business practices that threatened the core of Alibaba’s business, including:
• the payment of bribes to Alibaba workers by merchants and others seeking help to further their sales, Internet search rankings, and procurement of prime advertising space on Alibaba’s website and portal;
• a highly material amount of sales of counterfeit goods, including fake cigarettes, alcohol and branded handbags, by vendors on Alibaba’s third-party marketplace platform;
• the fact that regulators had accused Alibaba of alleged anticompetitive behavior such as forbidding merchants to participate in rival sites’ promotions;
• the sale of restricted weapons and other prohibited items on Alibaba’s third party marketplace platform; and
• that Alibaba ignored the practice by some vendors of faking transactions to make their sales volumes appear higher.

Allergan Inc.

Securities Class Action

SAN DIEGO – December 17, 2014. BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC. today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of persons who sold Allergan, Inc. (NYSE: AGN) common stock between February 25, 2014 and April 21, 2014 (the “Class Period”).
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from December 17, 2014. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Frank A. Bottini or Albert Y. Chang of Bottini & Bottini at (858) 914-2001, or via e-mail at fbottini@bottinilaw.com or achang@bottinilaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint on this website. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
The complaint charges defendants Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc., Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, AGMS Inc., Pershing Square Asset Management L.P., William A. Ackman, PS Management GP, LLC, and PS Fund 1, LLC (“Defendants”) with violations of Sections 14(e) and 20A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Plaintiff alleges that Valeant unlawfully tipped Pershing Square about its plan to make a tender offer for Allergan, with Pershing Square then trading on such material, non-public information by buying an approximately 9.7% stake in Allergan during the Class Period without first disclosing Valeant’s plan to pursue a tender offer to acquire Allergan at a significant premium.
When Valeant first disclosed its desire to pursue an acquisition of Allergan to the stock market on April 22, 2014, Allergan’s stock price soared, rising from a closing price the previous day of $141.88 to close at $163.51 on April 22, 2014 on huge volume of over 32 million shares – ten times Allergan’s average daily trading volume during the Class Period.

FireEye

Securities Class Action

This is a securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of FireEye, Inc. pursuant or traceable to the Company’s false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with its March 7, 2014 Secondary Offering, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933 (“1933 Act”). This complaint asserts claims exclusively under the 1933 Act for strict liability and negligence.

On July 10, 2015, the Hon. Peter Kirwan, head of the Complex Litigation Department in Santa Clara Superior Court, denied defendants' demurrer to the complaint.

FireEye’s Secondary Offering was priced at $82 after the close of trading on March 6, 2014, and the shares began trading on March 7, 2014. Shortly after the Secondary Offering, the stock price began to decline precipitously and has never recovered. The stock is currently trading at approximately $32 per share.

Barclays

Class action

On July 31, 2014, Bottini & Bottini, Inc. filed a class action complaint against Barclays PLC and Barclays Capital, Inc. (“Barclays”) on behalf of its client, Great Pacific Securities and all others similarly situated, in federal court in Los Angeles. The "Class," which is the group of persons on whose behalf the case is brought, is defined as all persons and entities who were clients of...

Chemed Corporation

Shareholder Derivative Action

On November 14, 2013, Bottini & Bottini Inc. filed a shareholder derivative action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio involving Chemed Corp. The complaint alleges that the Company's officers (CEO McNamara and CFO O'Toole) and directors breached their fiduciary duties by causing Chemed's VITAS unit to violate Medicare and Medicaid rules and regulations,...

Career Education Corporation

Shareholder Derivative Action

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. served as lead counsel for Plaintiff Amy Cook in a shareholder derivative action filed in federal court in Chicago. The case was filed on December 22, 2011, and alleged, among other things, that since April 2007 and/or thereafter, the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties as directors and/or officers of Career Education by causing the Company (stock...

Maxwell Technologies Inc.

Shareholder Derivative Action

PLEASE NOTE: This case has settled. Please click on "Settled Cases" for information concerning the settlement.

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. is co-lead counsel for Plaintiffs in a shareholder derivative action brought to remedy the wrongdoing committed by Maxwell’s directors and officers, and by Maxwell’s outside auditor McGladrey, between April 28, 2011 and the present. During such...

Zynga Inc.

Securities Class Action

On August 1, 2012, Bottini and Bottini, Inc. filed a complaint alleging violations of the federal securities laws by Zynga, certain of its officers and/or directors, and the underwriters of Zynga’s Secondary Offering. The case is brought on behalf of all persons who acquired the Class A common stock of Zynga pursuant or traceable to the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with Zynga’s Secondary Offering, which closed on April 3, 2012. The complaint alleges that the Registration Statement and Prospectus for Zynga’s Secondary Offering were inaccurate and misleading, contained untrue statements of material facts, omitted to state other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading and omitted to state material facts required to be disclosed.

The case is pending in the Superior Court of San Francisco. As result of the proceedings held on August 2, 2013, the Court ordered the proceedings in the case to be temporarily stayed pending the federal court’s ruling on the motions to dismiss in In re Zynga Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 3:12-cv-04007 (N.D. Cal. May 31, 2013).

Old Republic

Consumer Class Action

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. represents a nationwide plaintiff class against Old Republic Home Protection Company. The Complaint was filed on September 26, 2012, and alleges that the Company falsely advertised its home protection contracts, committed promissory fraud, engaged in deceit, violated California Insurance Code §332, and violated the State’s Unfair Competition Law. The Class...

Audience Inc.

Securities Class Action

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. represents shareholders in securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Audience common stock pursuant or traceable to the Company’s registration statement and prospectus filed in connection with its May 9, 2012 initial public offering.

On September 13, 2012, Bottini & Bottini filed a First Amended Complaint, alleging claims under the Securities Act of 1933 against Audience and certain of its officers and directors and the Company’s underwriters. The Complaint alleges that Audience’s May 8, 2012 Registration Statement was negligently prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading. The Complaint also alleges that the Company’s May 10, 2012 Prospectus, which was incorporated by reference into the Registration Statement and was utilized for the IPO, was inaccurate and misleading because it omitted facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading, and omitted material facts.

The Complaint asserts a violation of § 11 of the Securities Act against all Defendants because the Registration Statement for the IPO was inaccurate and misleading, contained untrue statements of material fact, omitted facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading, and omitted material facts. The Complaint also asserts a claim for control-person liability under § 15 of the Securities Act against Audience, the Insider Directors, and the Outside Directors.

By Order dated September 3, 2013, the Court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint and Defendants’ motion to stay. Discovery has now begun.

Groupon

Securities Class Action

On December 21, 2012, Bottini & Bottini, Inc. filed a complaint alleging violations of the federal securities laws by Groupon, Inc. and certain of its officers and/or directors. The class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of purchasers of Groupon common stock between May 14, 2012 and November 8, 2012 (the “Class Period”).

Hewlett-Packard Company

Shareholder Derivative Action

On November 30, 2012, Bottini & Bottini, Inc. filed a shareholder derivative action against various current and former officers and directors of the Hewlett-Packard Company, as well as Deloitte LLP and KPMG LLP, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty and other wrongdoing associated with Hewlett-Packard's acquisition of Autonomy plc and false and misleading statements the defendants caused...

Whistleblower Cases

Whistleblower Cases

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. is currently handling numerous whistbleblower actions on behalf of private citizens and employees. We cannot post information about those cases here because federal law requires whistleblower complaints to be filed under seal and kept strictly confidential.

One issue that sometimes arises in the mind of potential clients who contact us is whether they...

Ashford University

Consumer Class Action

We are lead counsel in a consumer class action case on behalf of current and former students of Ashford University, which is owned and operated by Bridgepoint. The case seeks to represent students who attended Ashford University at any time between March 1, 2005 and the present. A copy of the complaint and the Court's order denying defendants' motion to dismiss is attached below.
...

Career Education

Shareholder Derivative Action

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. is lead counsel in a shareholder derivative action against officers and directors of Career Education, Inc. The complaint was filed on December 22, 2011 and is pending in federal court in Chicago. By Order dated August 13, 2012, the Court denied Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and held that Plaintiff had adequately alleged demand futility and had standing to assert...

Heald and Everest schools/Corinthian Colleges Inc.

Consumer Class Action

We represent current and former students who attended either of the Everest or Heald schools owned by Corinthian Colleges. On January 25, 2011, due to extensive complaints to us by students who had attended the Heald and Everest group of schools owned and operated by Corinthian, we filed a class action complaint in federal court in Santa Ana, California. A copy of the complaint is attached...

Fidelity National Home Warranty

Consumer Class Action

The lawyers at Bottini & Bottini, Inc. have been litigating a consumer class action lawsuit against Fidelity National Home Warranty Company ("Fidelity") for several years. The class was certified by the San Diego Superior Court by order dated November 1, 2010. The parties thereafer continued to engage in substantial discovery. In 2011, the defendant brought a motion asking the court to...

First American Home Buyers Protection Corp.

Consumer Class Action

Bottini & Bottini is currently representing consumers who purchased and/or own home warranty plans, also known as home protection contracts. Discovery is currently being conducted and plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on November 24, 2014. In their motion for class certification, Plaintiffs allege that First American engages in false advertising by promising its...