Himax Technologies, Inc. HIMX (last ticker on record)
CIK 1342338Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
NoneThese 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
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 3
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
No red flag or SEC or Justice Department event on record.
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.
- Conyers Dill & PearmanFirst linked Mar 2006 · Named in a filing · 531 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.89× · Went dark 0.35× · 95% wipeout 1.14×
- Davis PolkFirst linked Mar 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,696 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.25× · Went dark 0.06× · 95% wipeout 0.99×
- Shearman & SterlingFirst linked Mar 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 2,650 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.21× · Went dark 0.13× · 95% wipeout 0.84×
- Latham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Mar 2006 · Text search only · 2,667 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.08×
- Baker & McKenzieFirst linked Mar 2006 · Text search only · 587 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 0.72× · 95% wipeout 0.96×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conyers Dill & Pearman | Mar 2006 | Named in a filing | 531 | 0.89 | 0.35 | 1.14 |
| Davis Polk | Mar 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,696 | 1.25 | 0.06 | 0.99 |
| Shearman & Sterling | Mar 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 2,650 | 1.21 | 0.13 | 0.84 |
| Latham & Watkins LLP | Mar 2006 | Text search only | 2,667 | 0.98 | 0.31 | 1.08 |
| Baker & McKenzie | Mar 2006 | Text search only | 587 | 1.07 | 0.72 | 0.96 |
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.
- James C. LinDavis PolkFirst linked Jul 2009 · Named in SEC correspondence · 76 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.91× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.96×
- John G. CrowleyDavis PolkFirst linked Mar 2006 · Named in a filing · 12 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.58× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.67×
- Matthew D. BersaniShearman & SterlingFirst linked Mar 2006 · Named in SEC correspondence · 25 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.71× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.50×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| James C. LinDavis Polk | Jul 2009 | Named in SEC correspondence | 76 | 0.91 | 0.00 | 0.96 |
| John G. CrowleyDavis Polk | Mar 2006 | Named in a filing | 12 | 1.58 | 0.00 | 1.67 |
| Matthew D. BersaniShearman & Sterling | Mar 2006 | Named in SEC correspondence | 25 | 0.71 | 0.00 | 0.50 |