A former Chairman of the the Advisory Board of a professional mutual fund pleaded guilty today in federal court to a series of charges in a $13 million conspiracy to defraud in investors by falsely claiming that Praetorian Global Fund Ltd. privately owned pre-IPO Facebook and Groupon stock before each of the social media start-ups went public. In reality, the British Virgin Islands-based fund did not.
According to documents in the case, Mattera spent nearly $4 million of approximately $13 million illegally acquired in the conspiracy so that he and his family could have the accoutrements of a luxurious life: buying jewelry, expensive cars, and interior decorating projects.
In a Solomonic ruling, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Manuel Mendez recently denied a defendants’ sweeping Notice to Admit social media account postings by a personal injury plaintiff in Carr v. Bovis Lend Lease (read the decision below). In New York, unless a party objects to another’s pre-trial Notice to Admit, they run the risk of admitting something they don’t disagree with, potentially helping another litigant through inaction. In Carr, the defendants’ Notice to Admit sought to have plaintiff admit to making Facebook, Twitter, and other social media postings online, even though plaintiff only acknowledged having a Facebook account.
Here, Justice Mendez gave each party a little victory, and perhaps a setback too.
Last week, Sprint filed several requests for the issuance of subpoenas in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The purpose of the subpoenas, according to the declarations accompanying them, is to reveal the identity of one who identifies him/herself as a ‘mole’ or insider in the company who may be violating Sprint’s copyright. The mystery mole has a Gmail account, as well as accounts on Facebook and Twitter, and Sprint has requested that the court subpoena all three companies.
The mystery mole purports to leak inside information “from deep within the enterprise,” though the logo on each of its pages contains nearly illegible text that says “Not affiliated w/ SprintNextel.”
Today U.S. Magistrate Judge Leslie Foschio warned that the court is “more than suspicio[us] that” plaintiff Paul Ceglia” filed no less than five (5) motions against Facebook and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in his lawsuit claiming a fifty-percent (50%) ownership of the company, “solely to unreasonably and vexatiously multiply the proceedings.”
Judge Foschio ordered Ceglia to explain within ten days why he should not be sanctioned yet again in the “contentious” litigation.
This could be the second time that Ceglia would be sanctioned in the case.
The case involves Ceglia’s purported claims to having a 2003 contract with Zuckerberg giving him ownership of one-half of Facebook. The Silicon Valley-based social media giant and CEO Mark Zuckerberg contend that the alleged contract Ceglia claims to have is a forgery, and that the case should be dismissed.
Facebook faces a lawsuit by new shareholders in the social networking company, filed less than a week after its IPO.
The shareholders allege that Facebook misled them by filing untrue statements in legal filings with the S.E.C., failed to prevent such statements from being misleading, and did not properly prepare the documents for prospective shareholders.
While another shareholder sued NASDAQ yesterday over the exchange’s acknowledged trading glitches, but this lawsuit specifically targets Facebook, board members, and investment banks.
A class action lawsuit was filed yesterday against NASDAQ by an individual investor accusing the stock exchange of botching his Facebook stock (FB) orders on the day of the IPO.
Plaintiff Phillip Goldberg alleges that he “placed purchase and cancellation orders for Facebook’s stock that NASDAQ failed to promptly and accurately execute” last Friday, May 18, 2012, causing he and scores of other investors to suffer losses on their trades (view the lawsuit below).
The exchange’s CEO Robert Greifeld acknowledged that NASDAQ had a host of trading glitches on the day of the IPO, including a foul-up with the trading system’s ability to handle order cancellations.
Now, NASDAQ’s admission of its Facebook faux pas prompted an S.E.C. inquiry, and securities class action lawyers are prospecting for clients.
Facebook filed its Amended S-1 Registration Statement (read it below) with the SEC today, a little more than two weeks before the social media company’s IPO.
The company, whose NASDAQ ticker symbol will be ‘FB’ estimates “the initial public offering price will be between $28.00 and $35.00 per share.” That would put Facebook’s corporate valuation at approximately $100 billion.
Of course, the company didn’t forget to list a few risks.
Facebook’s and Mark Zuckerberg’s lawyers told a federal court yesterday that convicted felon Paul Ceglia’s latest discovery requests should be put on hold, and that Ceglia’s lawsuit claiming a fifty-percent (50%) ownership stake in Facebook should be dismissed.
Lawyers at Gibson Dunn were emphatic that the court should not “perversely reward [Ceglia] for his ongoing efforts to derail the discovery process” by keeping his lawsuit alive.
Perhaps more importantly, they argue, Ceglia’s failure to dispute that emails he sent in 2004 to a then assistant attorney general at the Illinois Attorney General’s office “conclusively proves that the [disputed] Work for Hire Document is a fake.”
Facebook filed its answer and counterclaims against Yahoo! today in the Silicon Valley patent battle between the social networking giant and the fading portal.
Yahoo filed its patent lawsuit three weeks ago, and Facebook fired back a salvo of patent infringement counterclaims right back at the portal.
Facebook claims that Yahoo is violating the following patents:
A former Chairman of the the Advisory Board of a professional mutual fund pleaded guilty today in federal court to a series of charges in a $13 million conspiracy to defraud in investors by falsely claiming that Praetorian Global Fund Ltd. privately owned pre-IPO Facebook and Groupon stock before each of the social media start-ups went public. In reality, the British Virgin Islands-based fund did not.
Last week, Sprint filed several requests for the issuance of subpoenas in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The purpose of the subpoenas, according to the declarations accompanying them, is to reveal the identity of one who identifies him/herself as a ‘mole’ or insider in the company who may be violating Sprint’s copyright. The mystery mole has a Gmail account, as well as accounts on 
Facebook’s IPO on Friday brought with it 
Facebook filed its Amended S-1 Registration Statement (read it below) with the SEC today, a little more than two weeks before the social media company’s IPO.
Facebook’s and Mark Zuckerberg’s lawyers told a federal court yesterday that 
Facebook filed its answer and counterclaims against Yahoo! today in the Silicon Valley patent battle between the social networking giant and the fading portal.
