AMETEK INC/ AME (last ticker on record)
CIK 1037868Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
NoneThese 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
- 0
- None on record
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 4
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
No red flag or SEC or Justice Department event on record.
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.
- Pepper HamiltonFirst linked May 2020 · Named in a filing · 340 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 0.35× · 95% wipeout 1.11×
- Saul EwingFirst linked May 2011 · Named in a filing · 100 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.22× · Went dark 1.01× · 95% wipeout 1.09×
- Morgan LewisFirst linked May 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,028 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.18× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.01×
- Stroock & Stroock & LavanFirst linked Sep 1997 · Named in a filing · 178 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.78× · 95% wipeout 0.89×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pepper Hamilton | May 2020 | Named in a filing | 340 | 1.03 | 0.35 | 1.11 |
| Saul Ewing | May 2011 | Named in a filing | 100 | 1.22 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| Morgan Lewis | May 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,028 | 1.18 | 0.31 | 1.01 |
| Stroock & Stroock & Lavan | Sep 1997 | Named in a filing | 178 | 0.98 | 0.78 | 0.89 |
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.
- Scott R. JonesPepper HamiltonFirst linked May 2020 · Named in a filing · 18 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.37× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.20×
- Andrew E. ZuckermanReid and RiegeFirst linked Nov 2016 · Named in a filing · 72 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.12× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.70×
- Alan SingerMorgan LewisFirst linked May 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 23 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.09× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.37×
- David J. KaufmanDuane MorrisFirst linked Aug 2002 · Named in a filing · 18 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.38× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.93×
- Anna T. PinedoMorrison & FoersterFirst linked Dec 2001 · Named in a filing · 51 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.13× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.68×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scott R. JonesPepper Hamilton | May 2020 | Named in a filing | 18 | 1.37 | 0.00 | 1.20 |
| Andrew E. ZuckermanReid and Riege | Nov 2016 | Named in a filing | 72 | 1.12 | 0.00 | 0.70 |
| Alan SingerMorgan Lewis | May 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 23 | 1.09 | 0.00 | 0.37 |
| David J. KaufmanDuane Morris | Aug 2002 | Named in a filing | 18 | 0.38 | 0.00 | 0.93 |
| Anna T. PinedoMorrison & Foerster | Dec 2001 | Named in a filing | 51 | 1.13 | 0.00 | 0.68 |