China Medical Technologies, Inc. CMED (last ticker on record)
CIK 1326059Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- 95% wipeout
- SEC/DOJ scrutiny
- 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
- 2
- Newest began Jun 2012
- Largest fall in its shares
- 97%
- Feb 2008 to Feb 2012
- Law firms
- 13
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- SEC action against a company that stopped filingSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- SEC trading suspensionSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- Shares down 95% from their high
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.
- Ropes & GrayFirst linked Nov 2011 · Named in SEC correspondence · 914 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.14× · 95% wipeout 0.92×
- Simpson Thacher & BartlettFirst linked Nov 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,396 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.28× · Went dark 0.11× · 95% wipeout 0.92×
- Latham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Jul 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 2,667 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.10×
- Shearman & SterlingFirst linked Jul 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 2,649 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.21× · Went dark 0.13× · 95% wipeout 0.87×
- Akin GumpFirst linked Mar 2006 · Text search only · 582 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.24× · Went dark 0.52× · 95% wipeout 1.25×
- Allen & OveryFirst linked Mar 2006 · Text search only · 244 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.00× · Went dark 0.36× · 95% wipeout 0.66×
- Preston Gates & EllisFirst linked Mar 2006 · Text search only · 159 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.36× · Went dark 1.62× · 95% wipeout 1.44×
- Baker & McKenzieFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 587 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 0.72× · 95% wipeout 1.00×
- Guantao Law FirmFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 22 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.90× · Went dark 1.03× · 95% wipeout 0.98×
- Jingtian & Gongcheng Attorneys at LawFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 79 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.11× · Went dark 1.13× · 95% wipeout 0.88×
- Jones DayFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 686 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.25× · Went dark 0.54× · 95% wipeout 1.12×
- Patterson Belknap Webb & TylerFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 185 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.89× · Went dark 0.51× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Walkers (Cayman)First linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 191 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.25× · Went dark 0.26× · 95% wipeout 0.82×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ropes & Gray | Nov 2011 | Named in SEC correspondence | 914 | 0.98 | 0.14 | 0.92 |
| Simpson Thacher & Bartlett | Nov 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,396 | 1.28 | 0.11 | 0.92 |
| Latham & Watkins LLP | Jul 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 2,667 | 0.98 | 0.31 | 1.10 |
| Shearman & Sterling | Jul 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 2,649 | 1.21 | 0.13 | 0.87 |
| Akin Gump | Mar 2006 | Text search only | 582 | 1.24 | 0.52 | 1.25 |
| Allen & Overy | Mar 2006 | Text search only | 244 | 1.00 | 0.36 | 0.66 |
| Preston Gates & Ellis | Mar 2006 | Text search only | 159 | 1.36 | 1.62 | 1.44 |
| Baker & McKenzie | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 587 | 1.07 | 0.72 | 1.00 |
| Guantao Law Firm | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 22 | 1.90 | 1.03 | 0.98 |
| Jingtian & Gongcheng Attorneys at Law | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 79 | 1.11 | 1.13 | 0.88 |
| Jones Day | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 686 | 1.25 | 0.54 | 1.12 |
| Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 185 | 0.89 | 0.51 | 1.17 |
| Walkers (Cayman) | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 191 | 1.25 | 0.26 | 0.82 |
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.
- Paul W. Boltz Jr.Ropes & GrayFirst linked Nov 2011 · Named in a filing · 17 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 1.29× · 95% wipeout 0.86×
- David T. ZhangKirkland & EllisFirst linked Jul 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 118 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 0.61× · 95% wipeout 1.22×
- Chris LinSimpson Thacher & BartlettFirst linked Jan 2007 · Text search only · 39 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.28× · Went dark 1.55× · 95% wipeout 1.65×
- John A. OtoshiLatham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 24 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.77× · Went dark 1.16× · 95% wipeout 1.42×
- Lee EdwardsShearman & SterlingFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 18 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.22× · Went dark 0.65× · 95% wipeout 2.33×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paul W. Boltz Jr.Ropes & Gray | Nov 2011 | Named in a filing | 17 | 1.07 | 1.29 | 0.86 |
| David T. ZhangKirkland & Ellis | Jul 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 118 | 1.03 | 0.61 | 1.22 |
| Chris LinSimpson Thacher & Bartlett | Jan 2007 | Text search only | 39 | 1.28 | 1.55 | 1.65 |
| John A. OtoshiLatham & Watkins LLP | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 24 | 1.77 | 1.16 | 1.42 |
| Lee EdwardsShearman & Sterling | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 18 | 2.22 | 0.65 | 2.33 |