In a significant victory for investors, Pomerantz, as sole lead counsel for the class, along with lead plaintiff Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited, has achieved a historic $2.95 billion partial settlement with Petroleo Brasileiro S.A.–Petrobras–and its related entity, Petrobras International Finance Company (“Pifco”), as well as certain of Petrobras’ former executives and directors. This is not only the largest securities class action settlement in a decade, but is the largest settlement ever in a class action involving a foreign issuer, the fifth-largest class action settlement ever achieved in the United States, and the largest settlement achieved by a foreign lead plaintiff. Based on the charges taken by Petrobras relating to the opt-out settlements to date, the class settlement also represents a significant premium over the settlement of the individual actions on a pro rata basis. Claims against Petrobras’ auditor, PricewaterhouseCoopers Auditores Independentes (“PWC Brazil”), are still pending. read more...
In a significant victory for investors, Pomerantz, as sole lead counsel for the class, along with Lead Plaintiff Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited, achieved a historic $3 billion partial settlement with Petroleo Brasileiro S.A.--Petrobras and its auditor, PwC Brazil.
In March 2018, Pomerantz, as co-lead counsel, reached a tentative settlement of $80 million in a securities class action against technology and media giant Yahoo. The litigation concerns allegations related to two data breaches in 2014 in which over 1.5 billion Yahoo user accounts were compromised.
Read about the case here
Pomerantz represents Banco Safra SA, one of the largest banks in Brazil, in a class action against Samarco Mineracao SA, relating to the loss in value to the company’s bonds triggered by the Fundão dam-burst disaster.
Pomerantz is co-lead counsel in a securities class action against international pharmaceutical company Perrigo plc concerning allegations related to the company misleading investors as to its revenue growth potential in order to encourage them to reject a tender offer by Mylan N.V.
Read about the case here.
Pomerantz is co-lead counsel in a securities class action against holding company Blue Apron Holdings, Inc., which, through its subsidiaries, provides meal-kit delivery services, concerning allegations related to the company misleading investors as to its business, operational and compliance policies.
Read about the case here.
A WIN FOR INVESTORS IN BARCLAYS
Pomerantz is also sole Lead Counsel in In Strougo v. Barclays PLC, a class action alleging fraud in Barclays’ “dark pool,” a private trading venue where investors trade stocks almost anonymously. During the Class Period, Barclays’ dark pool catapulted into the financial stratosphere, with market share growth of 33% per year, as Barclay falsely promised investors that it would police the pool to “protect [clients] from predatory trading.” In fact, not only did Barclays allow aggressive traders into its dark pool, but it wooed them with perks that gave them a competitive edge over traditional traders. In November 2017, the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s certification of a class of Barclays’ investors and, citing its own recent decision in Petrobras, held that direct evidence from plaintiffs of price impact is not necessary, at the class certification stage, to demonstrate market efficiency. The Second Circuit also held that defendants seeking to rebut the presumption of reliance must do so by a preponderance of the evidence, confirming that plaintiffs have no burden to show price impact at the class certification stage—a significant win for plaintiffs. read more...
AT THE VANGUARD
OF LITIGATION AGAINST BP
Additional Successes in the Landmark BP Litigation In October 2014, Pomerantz once again secured crucial victories in its ground-breaking litigation over BP plc's ("BP") 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. This time, Pomerantz established the right of individual foreign investors who purchased foreign-traded shares of a foreign corporation to pursue claims for securities fraud in a U.S. court, thereby overcoming obstacles created by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010. read more...