U.S. China Mining Group, Inc. SGZH (last ticker on record)
CIK 1145761Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Restatement
- Went dark (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
- 1
- Newest began Mar 2012
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 3
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 6
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- SEC action against a company that stopped filingSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)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)
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.
- McKenna Long & AldridgeFirst linked Sep 2009 · Named in SEC correspondence · 62 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.33× · Went dark 0.27× · 95% wipeout 1.02×
- Richardson & Patel LLPFirst linked Dec 2008 · Named in SEC correspondence · 215 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 1.41× · 95% wipeout 1.28×
- The Crone Law GroupFirst linked Mar 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 116 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.23× · Went dark 2.14× · 95% wipeout 1.31×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McKenna Long & Aldridge | Sep 2009 | Named in SEC correspondence | 62 | 1.33 | 0.27 | 1.02 |
| Richardson & Patel LLP | Dec 2008 | Named in SEC correspondence | 215 | 1.07 | 1.41 | 1.28 |
| The Crone Law Group | Mar 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 116 | 1.23 | 2.14 | 1.31 |
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.
- Thomas WardellMcKenna Long & AldridgeFirst linked Sep 2009 · Named in SEC correspondence · 22 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.04× · Went dark 1.31× · 95% wipeout 0.93×
- Kevin K. LeungRichardson & Patel LLPFirst linked Apr 2009 · Named in a filing · 34 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.52× · Went dark 0.97× · 95% wipeout 1.49×
- Francis ChenRichardson & Patel LLPFirst linked Dec 2008 · Named in SEC correspondence · 15 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 2.49× · 95% wipeout 2.32×
- Scott C. KlinePillsbury WinthropFirst linked Jan 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 27 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.73× · Went dark 3.13× · 95% wipeout 2.34×
- Mark CroneThe Crone Law GroupFirst linked Mar 2006 · Named in a filing · 70 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.49× · Went dark 2.59× · 95% wipeout 1.38×
- Harold H. MartinMartin & Pritchett, P.A.First linked Dec 2003 · Named in a filing · 30 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.54× · Went dark 1.74× · 95% wipeout 1.31×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas WardellMcKenna Long & Aldridge | Sep 2009 | Named in SEC correspondence | 22 | 2.04 | 1.31 | 0.93 |
| Kevin K. LeungRichardson & Patel LLP | Apr 2009 | Named in a filing | 34 | 0.52 | 0.97 | 1.49 |
| Francis ChenRichardson & Patel LLP | Dec 2008 | Named in SEC correspondence | 15 | 0.00 | 2.49 | 2.32 |
| Scott C. KlinePillsbury Winthrop | Jan 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 27 | 0.73 | 3.13 | 2.34 |
| Mark CroneThe Crone Law Group | Mar 2006 | Named in a filing | 70 | 1.49 | 2.59 | 1.38 |
| Harold H. MartinMartin & Pritchett, P.A. | Dec 2003 | Named in a filing | 30 | 2.54 | 1.74 | 1.31 |