IMAX CORP IMAX (last ticker on record)
CIK 921582Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Restatement
- SEC/DOJ scrutiny
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- 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 Jun 2017
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 10
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 6
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- 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)
- A filing mentions a formal order of investigationForm 10-Q (opens in a new tab)
- Debt accelerated (Item 2.04)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)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)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.
- Cleary Gottlieb Steen & HamiltonFirst linked Feb 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 741 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.31× · Went dark 0.12× · 95% wipeout 0.76×
- McCarthy TetraultFirst linked Jul 2003 · Named in a filing · 111 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.76× · Went dark 0.57× · 95% wipeout 1.41×
- Shearman & SterlingFirst linked Jul 2003 · Named in SEC correspondence · 2,649 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.21× · Went dark 0.13× · 95% wipeout 0.87×
- Lionel Sawyer & CollinsFirst linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 128 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 0.88× · 95% wipeout 0.96×
- Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLPFirst linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 155 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.19× · Went dark 0.16× · 95% wipeout 0.77×
- Pryor CashmanFirst linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 229 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.28× · Went dark 1.25× · 95% wipeout 1.28×
- Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.First linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 995 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.46× · Went dark 0.37× · 95% wipeout 0.80×
- SIROTE & PERMUTTFirst linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 22 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.71× · Went dark 1.21× · 95% wipeout 0.43×
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLPFirst linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 2,607 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.15× · Went dark 0.19× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
- Stikeman ElliottFirst linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 225 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.08× · Went dark 0.11× · 95% wipeout 1.06×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton | Feb 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 741 | 1.31 | 0.12 | 0.76 |
| McCarthy Tetrault | Jul 2003 | Named in a filing | 111 | 0.76 | 0.57 | 1.41 |
| Shearman & Sterling | Jul 2003 | Named in SEC correspondence | 2,649 | 1.21 | 0.13 | 0.87 |
| Lionel Sawyer & Collins | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 128 | 1.07 | 0.88 | 0.96 |
| Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 155 | 1.19 | 0.16 | 0.77 |
| Pryor Cashman | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 229 | 1.28 | 1.25 | 1.28 |
| Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 995 | 1.46 | 0.37 | 0.80 |
| SIROTE & PERMUTT | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 22 | 1.71 | 1.21 | 0.43 |
| Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 2,607 | 1.15 | 0.19 | 0.85 |
| Stikeman Elliott | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 225 | 1.08 | 0.11 | 1.06 |
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.
- Gillian Emmett MoldowanShearman & SterlingFirst linked Jun 2020 · Named in a filing · 20 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.41×
- Jason R. LehnerShearman & SterlingFirst linked Feb 2009 · Named in SEC correspondence · 11 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.90× · Went dark 1.82× · 95% wipeout 0.72×
- Sandra L. FlowCleary Gottlieb Steen & HamiltonFirst linked Aug 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 24 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.66× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.65×
- Paul T. ShultzFirst linked Jun 2006 · Named in a filing · 136 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.34× · Went dark 0.18× · 95% wipeout 1.49×
- Brice T. VoranShearman & SterlingFirst linked Jul 2003 · Named in a filing · 11 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.49× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.67×
- NICHOLAS P. SAGGESEHolme Roberts & Owen LLPFirst linked Feb 2004 · Text search only · 26 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.97× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.40×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gillian Emmett MoldowanShearman & Sterling | Jun 2020 | Named in a filing | 20 | 0.79 | 0.00 | 1.41 |
| Jason R. LehnerShearman & Sterling | Feb 2009 | Named in SEC correspondence | 11 | 0.90 | 1.82 | 0.72 |
| Sandra L. FlowCleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton | Aug 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 24 | 2.66 | 0.00 | 1.65 |
| Paul T. Shultz | Jun 2006 | Named in a filing | 136 | 1.34 | 0.18 | 1.49 |
| Brice T. VoranShearman & Sterling | Jul 2003 | Named in a filing | 11 | 2.49 | 0.00 | 0.67 |
| NICHOLAS P. SAGGESEHolme Roberts & Owen LLP | Feb 2004 | Text search only | 26 | 1.97 | 0.00 | 1.40 |