RMG Networks Holding Corp RMGN (last ticker on record)
CIK 1512074Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Restatement
- 95% wipeout
- Delisting notice (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 2015
- Largest fall in its shares
- 99%
- Apr 2013 to Dec 2017
- Law firms
- 10
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 4
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Shares down 95% from their high
- 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 (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.
- Foley & LardnerFirst linked May 2018 · Named in SEC correspondence · 498 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.00× · Went dark 0.71× · 95% wipeout 1.02×
- Mayer BrownFirst linked May 2018 · Named in SEC correspondence · 680 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.34× · 95% wipeout 0.94×
- DLA PiperFirst linked Feb 2013 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,184 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.00× · Went dark 0.45× · 95% wipeout 1.20×
- Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLPFirst linked Feb 2011 · Named in SEC correspondence · 963 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.96× · Went dark 1.12× · 95% wipeout 1.21×
- Greenberg TraurigFirst linked Feb 2011 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,223 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.01× · Went dark 1.03× · 95% wipeout 1.10×
- Perkins CoieFirst linked Jul 2013 · Text search only · 511 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.93× · Went dark 0.27× · 95% wipeout 0.98×
- Moore & Van AllenFirst linked Jun 2013 · Text search only · 131 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.66× · Went dark 0.17× · 95% wipeout 0.90×
- Polsinelli PCFirst linked Jun 2013 · Text search only · 82 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.22× · Went dark 0.81× · 95% wipeout 1.36×
- Fenwick & West LLPFirst linked Feb 2013 · Text search only · 443 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.95× · Went dark 0.21× · 95% wipeout 1.23×
- Kirkland & EllisFirst linked Feb 2011 · Text search only · 1,686 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.17× · 95% wipeout 0.87×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foley & Lardner | May 2018 | Named in SEC correspondence | 498 | 1.00 | 0.71 | 1.02 |
| Mayer Brown | May 2018 | Named in SEC correspondence | 680 | 0.98 | 0.34 | 0.94 |
| DLA Piper | Feb 2013 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,184 | 1.00 | 0.45 | 1.20 |
| Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP | Feb 2011 | Named in SEC correspondence | 963 | 0.96 | 1.12 | 1.21 |
| Greenberg Traurig | Feb 2011 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,223 | 1.01 | 1.03 | 1.10 |
| Perkins Coie | Jul 2013 | Text search only | 511 | 0.93 | 0.27 | 0.98 |
| Moore & Van Allen | Jun 2013 | Text search only | 131 | 0.66 | 0.17 | 0.90 |
| Polsinelli PC | Jun 2013 | Text search only | 82 | 1.22 | 0.81 | 1.36 |
| Fenwick & West LLP | Feb 2013 | Text search only | 443 | 0.95 | 0.21 | 1.23 |
| Kirkland & Ellis | Feb 2011 | Text search only | 1,686 | 0.98 | 0.17 | 0.87 |
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.
- Douglas S. EllenoffEllenoff Grossman & Schole LLPFirst linked Feb 2011 · Named in SEC correspondence · 338 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.95× · Went dark 0.66× · 95% wipeout 0.95×
- Jason T. SimonGreenberg TraurigFirst linked Feb 2011 · Named in SEC correspondence · 120 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.68× · Went dark 0.30× · 95% wipeout 1.11×
- Stuart NeuhauserEllenoff Grossman & Schole LLPFirst linked Feb 2011 · Named in a filing · 416 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.78× · Went dark 0.42× · 95% wipeout 1.04×
- David K. MichaelsFenwick & West LLPFirst linked Feb 2013 · Text search only · 64 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.53× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.67×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Douglas S. EllenoffEllenoff Grossman & Schole LLP | Feb 2011 | Named in SEC correspondence | 338 | 0.95 | 0.66 | 0.95 |
| Jason T. SimonGreenberg Traurig | Feb 2011 | Named in SEC correspondence | 120 | 0.68 | 0.30 | 1.11 |
| Stuart NeuhauserEllenoff Grossman & Schole LLP | Feb 2011 | Named in a filing | 416 | 0.78 | 0.42 | 1.04 |
| David K. MichaelsFenwick & West LLP | Feb 2013 | Text search only | 64 | 1.53 | 0.00 | 0.67 |