Celyad Oncology SA
CIK 1637890Its 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
- 4
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 5
- 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.
- Patterson Belknap Webb & TylerFirst linked Jun 2015 · Named in SEC correspondence · 185 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.89× · Went dark 0.51× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Allen & OveryFirst linked Mar 2015 · Named in a filing · 244 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.00× · Went dark 0.36× · 95% wipeout 0.66×
- Goodwin ProcterFirst linked Mar 2015 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,221 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Hunton & WilliamsFirst linked May 2015 · Text search only · 404 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.06× · Went dark 0.36× · 95% wipeout 0.65×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler | Jun 2015 | Named in SEC correspondence | 185 | 0.89 | 0.51 | 1.17 |
| Allen & Overy | Mar 2015 | Named in a filing | 244 | 1.00 | 0.36 | 0.66 |
| Goodwin Procter | Mar 2015 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,221 | 0.79 | 0.31 | 1.17 |
| Hunton & Williams | May 2015 | Text search only | 404 | 1.06 | 0.36 | 0.65 |
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.
- Edwin O ConnorGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Aug 2020 · Named in SEC correspondence · 44 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.59× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.33×
- Herman H. RaspéPatterson Belknap Webb & TylerFirst linked Jun 2015 · Named in SEC correspondence · 10 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.69× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.48×
- Michael H. BisonGoodwin ProcterFirst linked May 2015 · Named in SEC correspondence · 29 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.85× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.22×
- Laurie A. BurlingameGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Mar 2015 · Named in SEC correspondence · 19 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.60× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.07×
- Mitchell S. BloomGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Mar 2015 · Named in SEC correspondence · 109 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.38× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.03×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edwin O ConnorGoodwin Procter | Aug 2020 | Named in SEC correspondence | 44 | 0.59 | 0.00 | 1.33 |
| Herman H. RaspéPatterson Belknap Webb & Tyler | Jun 2015 | Named in SEC correspondence | 10 | 0.69 | 0.00 | 1.48 |
| Michael H. BisonGoodwin Procter | May 2015 | Named in SEC correspondence | 29 | 1.85 | 0.00 | 1.22 |
| Laurie A. BurlingameGoodwin Procter | Mar 2015 | Named in SEC correspondence | 19 | 0.60 | 0.00 | 1.07 |
| Mitchell S. BloomGoodwin Procter | Mar 2015 | Named in SEC correspondence | 109 | 0.38 | 0.00 | 1.03 |