Capstone Energy Plus, Inc. CEPL (last ticker on record)
CIK 1009759Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- Restatement
- Bankruptcy
- 95% wipeout
- SEC/DOJ scrutiny
These figures describe clients, not conduct. A lawyer or firm can serve many companies that later had trouble for reasons that have nothing to do with their work, and nothing here says any lawyer or firm did anything wrong.
- Red flags
- 4
- Newest began Jun 2024
- Largest fall in its shares
- 96%
- Nov 2021 to Dec 2023
- Law firms
- 6
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 6
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- A filing mentions cooperating with the SECForm 10-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Shares down 95% from their high
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
An SEC release can name a company’s officer, or its stock as what a scheme sold or moved, so the company may be the victim. Each link goes to what to read.
Law firms
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- Katten Muchin Rosenman LLPFirst linked Mar 2021 · Named in SEC correspondence · 268 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.76× · Went dark 0.58× · 95% wipeout 1.22×
- Goodwin ProcterFirst linked Jul 2017 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,221 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Waller Lansden Dortch & DavisFirst linked Dec 2003 · Named in SEC correspondence · 76 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.06× · Went dark 0.65× · 95% wipeout 1.20×
- Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & RosatiFirst linked Dec 2002 · Named in a filing · 1,468 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.09× · Went dark 0.60× · 95% wipeout 1.42×
- Latham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Mar 2000 · Named in a filing · 2,667 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.10×
- Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLPFirst linked Jul 2018 · Text search only · 963 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.96× · Went dark 1.12× · 95% wipeout 1.21×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Mar 2021 | Named in SEC correspondence | 268 | 0.76 | 0.58 | 1.22 |
| Goodwin Procter | Jul 2017 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,221 | 0.79 | 0.31 | 1.17 |
| Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis | Dec 2003 | Named in SEC correspondence | 76 | 1.06 | 0.65 | 1.20 |
| Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati | Dec 2002 | Named in a filing | 1,468 | 1.09 | 0.60 | 1.42 |
| Latham & Watkins LLP | Mar 2000 | Named in a filing | 2,667 | 0.98 | 0.31 | 1.10 |
| Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP | Jul 2018 | Text search only | 963 | 0.96 | 1.12 | 1.21 |
Lawyers
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- Elizabeth C. McNicholKatten Muchin Rosenman LLPFirst linked Dec 2025 · Named in SEC correspondence · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.86×
- Mark D. WoodKatten Muchin Rosenman LLPFirst linked Mar 2021 · Named in SEC correspondence · 29 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.85× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.79×
- Jocelyn M. ArelGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Jul 2017 · Named in SEC correspondence · 63 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.45× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.44×
- J. CHASE COLEWaller Lansden Dortch & DavisFirst linked Dec 2003 · Named in a filing · 14 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.69× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.76×
- Neil WolffWilson Sonsini Goodrich & RosatiFirst linked Dec 2002 · Named in a filing · 9 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.20× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 4.24×
- BRIAN G. CARTWRIGHTLatham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Mar 2000 · Named in a filing · 12 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.13× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.88×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elizabeth C. McNicholKatten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Dec 2025 | Named in SEC correspondence | 6 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.86 |
| Mark D. WoodKatten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Mar 2021 | Named in SEC correspondence | 29 | 1.85 | 0.00 | 2.79 |
| Jocelyn M. ArelGoodwin Procter | Jul 2017 | Named in SEC correspondence | 63 | 1.45 | 0.00 | 1.44 |
| J. CHASE COLEWaller Lansden Dortch & Davis | Dec 2003 | Named in a filing | 14 | 0.69 | 0.00 | 0.76 |
| Neil WolffWilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati | Dec 2002 | Named in a filing | 9 | 2.20 | 0.00 | 4.24 |
| BRIAN G. CARTWRIGHTLatham & Watkins LLP | Mar 2000 | Named in a filing | 12 | 1.13 | 0.00 | 0.88 |