This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Corporations
Fraud
Securities Exchange Act

Scott Bruce, James P. Bachesta, Thanh Le, Chen Weifeng, Suntech Investor Group v. Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd., Zhengrong Shi, David King, Julian Ralph Worley, Amy Yi Zhang, David Hogg

Published: Jan. 18, 2014 | Result Date: Dec. 26, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 3:12-cv-04061-RS Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Casey E. Sadler
(Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP)

Lionel Z. Glancy
(Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP)

Robert V. Prongay
(Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP)

Michael M. Goldberg

Howard G. Smith
(Law Offices of Howard G. Smith)


Defendant

Stephen D. Hibbard
(Proskauer Rose LLP)

H. Miriam Farber

Jerome S. Fortinsky


Facts

Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd. was a solar energy company based in China. It designed, manufactured, and marketed photovoltaic products, meaning they were used to provide power for various utility customers around the world. In 2008, Suntech formed Global Solar Fund S.C.A. Sicar, a subsidiary it used to invest in solar energy projects.

In 2012, Suntech declared that it had been the victim of fraud, based on a large investment Global Solar fund had made. Suntech's share values then declined, and its shareholders filed a class action against it.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The shareholders argued that Suntech should have known about the fraud, and that as a result the company and its executives had made material misrepresentations to the shareholders.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that plaintiffs had failed to allege sufficient evidence to support their claims.

Result

The court granted the motion to dismiss.


#100251

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390