INFINITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. INFI (last ticker on record)
CIK 1113148Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Restatement
- 95% wipeout
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- Restructuring
- Bankruptcy
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 Sep 2023
- Largest fall in its shares
- 99%
- Apr 2013 to Nov 2023
- Law firms
- 8
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 9
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- 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)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)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)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)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)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Shares down 95% from their high
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)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)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)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.
- HALE AND DORRFirst linked May 2006 · Named in a filing · 665 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.06× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked May 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 662 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.14× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- Cooley LLPFirst linked Mar 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,634 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.71× · Went dark 0.44× · 95% wipeout 1.24×
- Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison LLPFirst linked May 2000 · Named in a filing · 350 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.17× · Went dark 0.81× · 95% wipeout 1.52×
- Katten Muchin Rosenman LLPFirst linked Feb 2014 · Text search only · 268 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.76× · Went dark 0.58× · 95% wipeout 1.22×
- Morris Nichols Arsht & TunnellFirst linked Jul 2006 · Text search only · 256 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.51× · Went dark 0.21× · 95% wipeout 0.89×
- Ropes & GrayFirst linked Jul 2006 · Text search only · 914 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.14× · 95% wipeout 0.92×
- Davies Ward Phillips & VinebergFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 94 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.35× · Went dark 0.21× · 95% wipeout 1.11×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HALE AND DORR | May 2006 | Named in a filing | 665 | 1.06 | 0.33 | 1.26 |
| WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | May 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 662 | 1.14 | 0.33 | 1.26 |
| Cooley LLP | Mar 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,634 | 0.71 | 0.44 | 1.24 |
| Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison LLP | May 2000 | Named in a filing | 350 | 1.17 | 0.81 | 1.52 |
| Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Feb 2014 | Text search only | 268 | 0.76 | 0.58 | 1.22 |
| Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell | Jul 2006 | Text search only | 256 | 1.51 | 0.21 | 0.89 |
| Ropes & Gray | Jul 2006 | Text search only | 914 | 0.98 | 0.14 | 0.92 |
| Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 94 | 0.35 | 0.21 | 1.11 |
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.
- Cynthia T. MazareasWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked Dec 2008 · Named in SEC correspondence · 21 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.49× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.13×
- Michael J. LaCasciaWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked Aug 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 13 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.42× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- Steven D. SingerWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked Aug 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 42 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.37× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.27×
- L. Kay ChandlerCooley LLPFirst linked Mar 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 17 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.11×
- Matthew T. BrowneCooley LLPFirst linked Mar 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 29 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.20× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.02×
- Hayden J. TrubittStradling Yocca Carlson & RauthFirst linked May 2000 · Named in a filing · 21 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.99× · Went dark 1.28× · 95% wipeout 1.33×
- Elliot PressKatten Muchin Rosenman LLPFirst linked Feb 2014 · Text search only · 7 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.92×
- John A. BurgessHALE AND DORRFirst linked May 2006 · Text search only · 31 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.99× · Went dark 0.80× · 95% wipeout 0.80×
- Robert H. MillerCooley LLPFirst linked May 2006 · Text search only · 7 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.63× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.21×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cynthia T. MazareasWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | Dec 2008 | Named in SEC correspondence | 21 | 0.49 | 0.00 | 1.13 |
| Michael J. LaCasciaWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | Aug 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 13 | 0.42 | 0.00 | 1.26 |
| Steven D. SingerWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | Aug 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 42 | 0.37 | 0.00 | 1.27 |
| L. Kay ChandlerCooley LLP | Mar 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 17 | 0.98 | 0.00 | 1.11 |
| Matthew T. BrowneCooley LLP | Mar 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 29 | 1.20 | 0.00 | 1.02 |
| Hayden J. TrubittStradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth | May 2000 | Named in a filing | 21 | 0.99 | 1.28 | 1.33 |
| Elliot PressKatten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Feb 2014 | Text search only | 7 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.92 |
| John A. BurgessHALE AND DORR | May 2006 | Text search only | 31 | 0.99 | 0.80 | 0.80 |
| Robert H. MillerCooley LLP | May 2006 | Text search only | 7 | 0.63 | 0.00 | 1.21 |