{"id":5577,"date":"2014-01-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2014-01-14T06:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/institutionalinvestorsecuritiesblog.blawgcloud.com\/2014\/01\/securities_fraud_court_matters"},"modified":"2022-05-05T12:37:15","modified_gmt":"2022-05-05T17:37:15","slug":"securities-fraud-court-matters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/","title":{"rendered":"Securities Fraud Court Matters"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>While a district court allowed the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.securities-fraud-attorneys.com\/\">securities fraud <\/a>claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. &amp; other defendants to go forward, the claims brought against the company under Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act were thrown out. The securities case is <em>Wang v. LightSpeed Environmental, Inc.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The court said that while the plaintiff, Tonglin Wang, sufficiently alleged justifiable reliance, specific misrepresentations, and scienter, so that certain claims could proceed, he did not succeed in his claims that there was a prospectus or a public offering or that there was any verbal exchange made about the prospectus.<\/p>\n<p>Wang is a Chinese businessman who wanted to invest in a US entity to obtain immigration status here via a federal program. In 2011, two individuals, who were LightSpeed agents (Wang did not know this), purportedly told him they would act as his translators and advisors.  He then was introduced to David Tarrant, CEO of ASG. He had the majority of voting shares in LightSpeed. <\/p>\n<div class=\"read_more_link\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/\"  title=\"Continue Reading Securities Fraud Court Matters\" class=\"more-link\">Continue Reading \u203a<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>While a district court allowed the securities fraud claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. &amp; other defendants to go forward, the claims brought against the company under Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act were thrown out. The securities case is Wang v. LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. The court said that while the plaintiff, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3741],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5577","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-securities-fraud"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Securities Fraud Court Matters &#8212; Investor Lawyers Blog &#8212; January 14, 2014<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While a district court allowed the securities fraud claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. &amp; other defendants to &#8212; January 14, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Securities Fraud Court Matters &#8212; Investor Lawyers Blog &#8212; January 14, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"While a district court allowed the securities fraud claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. &amp; other defendants to &#8212; January 14, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Shepherd Smith Edwards &amp; Kantas, LLP\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Securities Fraud Court Matters &#8212; Investor Lawyers Blog &#8212; January 14, 2014","description":"While a district court allowed the securities fraud claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. &amp; other defendants to &#8212; January 14, 2014","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Securities Fraud Court Matters &#8212; Investor Lawyers Blog &#8212; January 14, 2014","twitter_description":"While a district court allowed the securities fraud claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. &amp; other defendants to &#8212; January 14, 2014","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Shepherd Smith Edwards &amp; Kantas, LLP","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/"},"author":{"name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards &amp; Kantas, LLP","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"headline":"Securities Fraud Court Matters","datePublished":"2014-01-14T06:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2022-05-05T17:37:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/"},"wordCount":731,"articleSection":["Securities Fraud"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/","name":"Securities Fraud Court Matters &#8212; Investor Lawyers Blog &#8212; January 14, 2014","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2014-01-14T06:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2022-05-05T17:37:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"description":"While a district court allowed the securities fraud claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. &amp; other defendants to &#8212; January 14, 2014","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/securities-fraud-court-matters\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Securities Fraud Court Matters"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/","name":"Investor Lawyers Blog","description":"Published By Investment Fraud Attorneys \u2014 Shepherd Smith Edwards &amp; Kantas, LLP","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431","name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards &amp; Kantas, LLP","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Shepherd Smith Edwards &amp; Kantas, LLP"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pedX9K-1rX","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5577","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5577"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5577\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27441,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5577\/revisions\/27441"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5577"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5577"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5577"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}