ENERGY CONVERSION DEVICES INC ENER (last ticker on record)
CIK 32878Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- 95% wipeout
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- Bankruptcy
- Restructuring
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
- 3
- Newest began Feb 2012
- Largest fall in its shares
- 99%
- Jun 2008 to Aug 2012
- Law firms
- 3
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 2
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Shares down 95% from their high
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)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.
- Covington & BurlingFirst linked Jun 2008 · Named in SEC correspondence · 447 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 0.27× · 95% wipeout 0.99×
- Baker & McKenzieFirst linked Dec 2003 · Named in a filing · 587 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 0.72× · 95% wipeout 1.00×
- Jenner & BlockFirst linked Jun 1996 · Named in SEC correspondence · 122 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.12× · Went dark 0.78× · 95% wipeout 0.94×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Covington & Burling | Jun 2008 | Named in SEC correspondence | 447 | 1.07 | 0.27 | 0.99 |
| Baker & McKenzie | Dec 2003 | Named in a filing | 587 | 1.07 | 0.72 | 1.00 |
| Jenner & Block | Jun 1996 | Named in SEC correspondence | 122 | 1.12 | 0.78 | 0.94 |
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.
- W. Andrew JackCovington & BurlingFirst linked Oct 2009 · Named in SEC correspondence · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.91× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.07×
- Craig A. RoederBaker & McKenzieFirst linked Jun 1996 · Named in SEC correspondence · 19 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.30× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.72×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| W. Andrew JackCovington & Burling | Oct 2009 | Named in SEC correspondence | 6 | 1.91 | 0.00 | 2.07 |
| Craig A. RoederBaker & McKenzie | Jun 1996 | Named in SEC correspondence | 19 | 1.30 | 0.00 | 1.72 |