Phase Forward Inc PFWD (last ticker on record)
CIK 1050180Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
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
- 0
- None on record
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 13
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- 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.
- Davis PolkFirst linked Aug 2010 · Named in a filing · 1,694 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.26× · Went dark 0.06× · 95% wipeout 1.02×
- Goodwin ProcterFirst linked May 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,221 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLPFirst linked Mar 2004 · Named in a filing · 150 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.08× · Went dark 0.42× · 95% wipeout 1.31×
- Bingham DanaFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 104 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.37× · Went dark 0.54× · 95% wipeout 1.14×
- Bracewell LLPFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 247 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.93× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.03×
- Goulston & StorrsFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 86 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.90× · Went dark 0.34× · 95% wipeout 1.33×
- Gunderson DettmerFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 333 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.17× · Went dark 0.66× · 95% wipeout 1.32×
- HALE AND DORRFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 665 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.06× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- Hogan & HartsonFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 390 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 0.30× · 95% wipeout 1.18×
- Vinson & Elkins L.L.P.First linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 783 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.09× · Went dark 0.11× · 95% wipeout 1.03×
- Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLPFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 1,051 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.31× · Went dark 0.27× · 95% wipeout 0.91×
- WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 662 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.14× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- Covington & BurlingFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 447 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 0.27× · 95% wipeout 0.99×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Davis Polk | Aug 2010 | Named in a filing | 1,694 | 1.26 | 0.06 | 1.02 |
| Goodwin Procter | May 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,221 | 0.79 | 0.31 | 1.17 |
| Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLP | Mar 2004 | Named in a filing | 150 | 1.08 | 0.42 | 1.31 |
| Bingham Dana | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 104 | 1.37 | 0.54 | 1.14 |
| Bracewell LLP | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 247 | 0.93 | 0.31 | 1.03 |
| Goulston & Storrs | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 86 | 0.90 | 0.34 | 1.33 |
| Gunderson Dettmer | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 333 | 1.17 | 0.66 | 1.32 |
| HALE AND DORR | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 665 | 1.06 | 0.33 | 1.26 |
| Hogan & Hartson | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 390 | 1.03 | 0.30 | 1.18 |
| Vinson & Elkins L.L.P. | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 783 | 1.09 | 0.11 | 1.03 |
| Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 1,051 | 1.31 | 0.27 | 0.91 |
| WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 662 | 1.14 | 0.33 | 1.26 |
| Covington & Burling | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 447 | 1.07 | 0.27 | 0.99 |
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.
- Julia CowlesDavis PolkFirst linked Aug 2010 · Named in a filing · 12 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.94× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.69×
- Edward A. KingGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Jul 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 16 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.69× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.36×
- John M. MutkoskiGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Mar 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 26 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.39× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.25×
- William J. SchnoorGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Mar 2004 · Named in a filing · 23 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.58× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.14×
- R. Jay TaborWeil, Gotshal & Manges LLPFirst linked Apr 2004 · Text search only · 9 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.91× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.74×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Julia CowlesDavis Polk | Aug 2010 | Named in a filing | 12 | 0.94 | 0.00 | 1.69 |
| Edward A. KingGoodwin Procter | Jul 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 16 | 0.69 | 0.00 | 1.36 |
| John M. MutkoskiGoodwin Procter | Mar 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 26 | 0.39 | 0.00 | 1.25 |
| William J. SchnoorGoodwin Procter | Mar 2004 | Named in a filing | 23 | 0.58 | 0.00 | 1.14 |
| R. Jay TaborWeil, Gotshal & Manges LLP | Apr 2004 | Text search only | 9 | 0.91 | 0.00 | 2.74 |