EXP OldCo Winddown, Inc. EXPR (last ticker on record)
CIK 1483510Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- 95% wipeout
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- Restructuring
- Bankruptcy
- 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
- 4
- Newest began Dec 2024
- Largest fall in its shares
- 99%
- Mar 2012 to Apr 2024
- Law firms
- 9
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- SEC administrative proceedingSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- SEC enforcement releaseSEC release (opens in a new tab)
- An SEC release names it, an officer or its stockSEC release (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Debt accelerated (Item 2.04)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Shares down 95% from their high
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)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.
- Kirkland & EllisFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,686 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.17× · 95% wipeout 0.87×
- Latham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 2,667 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.10×
- Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLPFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in a filing · 147 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.13× · Went dark 0.16× · 95% wipeout 0.99×
- Cravath Swaine & MooreFirst linked May 2010 · Text search only · 839 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.29× · Went dark 0.03× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
- Steptoe & JohnsonFirst linked Mar 2010 · Text search only · 80 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.10× · Went dark 0.65× · 95% wipeout 1.34×
- Davis PolkFirst linked Feb 2010 · Text search only · 1,694 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.26× · Went dark 0.06× · 95% wipeout 1.02×
- Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur LLPFirst linked Feb 2010 · Text search only · 67 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.63× · Went dark 0.54× · 95% wipeout 1.07×
- Shearman & SterlingFirst linked Feb 2010 · Text search only · 2,649 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.21× · Went dark 0.13× · 95% wipeout 0.87×
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLPFirst linked Feb 2010 · Text search only · 2,607 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.15× · Went dark 0.19× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kirkland & Ellis | Feb 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,686 | 0.98 | 0.17 | 0.87 |
| Latham & Watkins LLP | Feb 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 2,667 | 0.98 | 0.31 | 1.10 |
| Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP | Feb 2010 | Named in a filing | 147 | 1.13 | 0.16 | 0.99 |
| Cravath Swaine & Moore | May 2010 | Text search only | 839 | 1.29 | 0.03 | 0.85 |
| Steptoe & Johnson | Mar 2010 | Text search only | 80 | 1.10 | 0.65 | 1.34 |
| Davis Polk | Feb 2010 | Text search only | 1,694 | 1.26 | 0.06 | 1.02 |
| Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur LLP | Feb 2010 | Text search only | 67 | 0.63 | 0.54 | 1.07 |
| Shearman & Sterling | Feb 2010 | Text search only | 2,649 | 1.21 | 0.13 | 0.87 |
| Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Feb 2010 | Text search only | 2,607 | 1.15 | 0.19 | 0.85 |
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.
- Alexander M. SchwartzSheppard MullinFirst linked Feb 2021 · Named in SEC correspondence · 14 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.17× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Marc D. JaffeLatham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 156 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.05× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.12×
- William R. BurkeKirkland & EllisFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.21× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.92×
- Robert M. HaywardKirkland & EllisFirst linked May 2010 · Text search only · 38 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.78× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.19×
- David L. CaplanDavis PolkFirst linked Feb 2010 · Text search only · 11 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.30× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.54×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alexander M. SchwartzSheppard Mullin | Feb 2021 | Named in SEC correspondence | 14 | 1.17 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Marc D. JaffeLatham & Watkins LLP | Feb 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 156 | 1.05 | 0.00 | 1.12 |
| William R. BurkeKirkland & Ellis | Feb 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 6 | 1.21 | 0.00 | 2.92 |
| Robert M. HaywardKirkland & Ellis | May 2010 | Text search only | 38 | 1.78 | 0.00 | 1.19 |
| David L. CaplanDavis Polk | Feb 2010 | Text search only | 11 | 2.30 | 0.00 | 1.54 |