According to the law firm press release, this action was brought against Defendants for violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that the Offering Documents for the March 2010 Offering were negligently prepared and failed to disclose material information about Orrstown's loan portfolio, underwriting practices, and internal controls. The complaint further alleges that Orrstown knowingly and/or recklessly continued to make false and misleading statements after the March 2010 Offering concerning the quality of Orrstown's loan portfolio, internal controls and lending practices while simultaneously assuring the investing public about the quality of Orrstown's management, underwriting procedures, and internal controls.

According to the law firm press release, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (1) the full impact of certain manufacturing flaws on the Company's earnings; (2) the Company was improperly recognizing revenue concerning certain products in its systems business; (3) the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

According to a press release dated February 23, 2012, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's financial performance and future prospects. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (a) that the Company had overbilled New York City hundreds of millions of dollars on the CityTime Project, a project associated with the modernization of New York City's employee payroll system, over a multi-year period; (b) that, as a result of the Company's known, but undisclosed, overbilling practices, its operating results during the Class Period were materially misstated; (c) that its overbilling practices subjected the Company to numerous undisclosed risks, including monetary risks and reputational risks, particularly because government agencies are the Company's primary customers and any harm to its reputation and/or relationships with such agencies would adversely affect its future revenues and growth prospects; (d) that, as a result of the foregoing circumstances, the Company violated applicable accounting standards associated with the recognition of revenue and the disclosure and accounting for loss contingencies; (e) that the Company's financial statements were not fairly presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and were materially false and misleading; (f) that certifications issued by defendants Kenneth C. Dahlberg and Mark W. Sopp associated with the Company's internal and disclosure controls were materially false and misleading; and (g) that, based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its business and prospects.

According to a press release dated January 13, 2012, the complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

According to a press release dated May 9, 2011, the action charges CHS and certain of its officers and directors with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the Company's financial results were artificially inflated by virtue of the fact that CHS was systematically overcharging Medicare, one of its principal sources of revenue.

According to a press release dated March 15, 2011, the complaint charges Finisar and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Finisar is a provider of optical subsystems and components that connect short-distance local area networks, storage area networks, longer distance metropolitan area networks, fiber-to-the-home networks, cable television networks and wide area networks.

On June 7, 2024, Fat Brands Inc. was sued for violations of the federal securities laws in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded Fat Brands securities, including Fat Brands Class A common stock (ticker symbol: FAT), Fat Brands Class B common stock (ticker symbol: FATBB), Fat Brands 8.25% Series B Cumulative Preferred Stock (ticker symbol: FATBP), and Fat Brands Warrants (ticker symbol: FATBW) between March 24, 2022 and May 10, 2024, inclusive (the “Class Period”).