Puda Coal, Inc. PUDA (last ticker on record)
CIK 1162747Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- Restatement
- 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
- 2
- Newest began Aug 2011
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 7
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 2
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- An SEC release names it, an officer or its stockSEC release (opens in a new tab)
- A filing mentions an SEC subpoenaForm 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- SEC trading suspensionSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K/A (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/A (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)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K/A (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)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K/A (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K/A (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.
- Goodwin ProcterFirst linked Jun 2009 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,221 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Broad and CasselFirst linked Mar 2008 · Named in a filing · 58 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.13× · Went dark 1.05× · 95% wipeout 1.93×
- Heller EhrmanFirst linked Mar 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 256 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.00× · Went dark 0.76× · 95% wipeout 0.96×
- Hodgson RussFirst linked Dec 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 85 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.15× · Went dark 0.91× · 95% wipeout 1.39×
- STEPHEN A. ZRENDA, JR., P.C.First linked Mar 2006 · Text search only · 25 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.61× · Went dark 1.06× · 95% wipeout 1.11×
- Hamilton & LehrerFirst linked Apr 2002 · Text search only · 20 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.87× · Went dark 1.75× · 95% wipeout 1.35×
- Hamilton Lehrer & DarganFirst linked Apr 2002 · Text search only · 20 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.44× · Went dark 1.66× · 95% wipeout 0.98×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goodwin Procter | Jun 2009 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,221 | 0.79 | 0.31 | 1.17 |
| Broad and Cassel | Mar 2008 | Named in a filing | 58 | 1.13 | 1.05 | 1.93 |
| Heller Ehrman | Mar 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 256 | 1.00 | 0.76 | 0.96 |
| Hodgson Russ | Dec 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 85 | 1.15 | 0.91 | 1.39 |
| STEPHEN A. ZRENDA, JR., P.C. | Mar 2006 | Text search only | 25 | 2.61 | 1.06 | 1.11 |
| Hamilton & Lehrer | Apr 2002 | Text search only | 20 | 1.87 | 1.75 | 1.35 |
| Hamilton Lehrer & Dargan | Apr 2002 | Text search only | 20 | 2.44 | 1.66 | 0.98 |
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.
- Stephen M. DavisGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Mar 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 20 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.61× · Went dark 1.35× · 95% wipeout 1.39×
- Omer OzdenBaker & McKenzieFirst linked Dec 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 5 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 3.05× · Went dark 1.94× · 95% wipeout 3.38×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stephen M. DavisGoodwin Procter | Mar 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 20 | 1.61 | 1.35 | 1.39 |
| Omer OzdenBaker & McKenzie | Dec 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 5 | 3.05 | 1.94 | 3.38 |