IFM Investments Ltd
CIK 1477324Its 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
- 7
- 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.
- Shearman & SterlingFirst linked Nov 2012 · Named in SEC correspondence · 2,649 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.21× · Went dark 0.13× · 95% wipeout 0.87×
- Commerce & Finance Law OfficesFirst linked Jan 2010 · Named in a filing · 157 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.00× · Went dark 0.53× · 95% wipeout 1.02×
- Conyers Dill & PearmanFirst linked Jan 2010 · Named in a filing · 531 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.89× · Went dark 0.35× · 95% wipeout 1.16×
- Jun He Law OfficesFirst linked Jan 2010 · Named in a filing · 73 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.89× · Went dark 0.68× · 95% wipeout 1.23×
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLPFirst linked Jan 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 2,607 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.15× · Went dark 0.19× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
- Dacheng Law OfficesFirst linked Jan 2010 · Text search only · 50 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.71× · Went dark 0.69× · 95% wipeout 1.09×
- DLA PiperFirst linked Jan 2010 · Text search only · 1,184 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.00× · Went dark 0.45× · 95% wipeout 1.20×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shearman & Sterling | Nov 2012 | Named in SEC correspondence | 2,649 | 1.21 | 0.13 | 0.87 |
| Commerce & Finance Law Offices | Jan 2010 | Named in a filing | 157 | 1.00 | 0.53 | 1.02 |
| Conyers Dill & Pearman | Jan 2010 | Named in a filing | 531 | 0.89 | 0.35 | 1.16 |
| Jun He Law Offices | Jan 2010 | Named in a filing | 73 | 0.89 | 0.68 | 1.23 |
| Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Jan 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 2,607 | 1.15 | 0.19 | 0.85 |
| Dacheng Law Offices | Jan 2010 | Text search only | 50 | 1.71 | 0.69 | 1.09 |
| DLA Piper | Jan 2010 | Text search only | 1,184 | 1.00 | 0.45 | 1.20 |
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.
- Alan SeemShearman & SterlingFirst linked May 2011 · Named in SEC correspondence · 34 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.24× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.25×
- Jon L ChristiansonSkadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLPFirst linked Jan 2010 · Named in a filing · 5 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Peter X. HuangSkadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLPFirst linked Jan 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 51 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.26× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.17×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alan SeemShearman & Sterling | May 2011 | Named in SEC correspondence | 34 | 1.24 | 0.00 | 1.25 |
| Jon L ChristiansonSkadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Jan 2010 | Named in a filing | 5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Peter X. HuangSkadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Jan 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 51 | 0.26 | 0.00 | 0.17 |