The Class Action. The case is called Xxxx Xxxxx, et. al. v.
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxxxxxxx et al. x. Xxxxx University et al., No. 16-cv-2920 (N.D. Ga.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entities they sued are called the Defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plans. The Defendants are Emory University and certain affiliates and individuals. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at Xxxxx000xXxxxxxxxxx.xxx.
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxxxx, et al. x. XxXxxxxx & Company, Inc., et al, Case No. 1:19-cv-01466- GHW-SN (S.D.N.Y.) (the “Class Action” or “lawsuit”). It has been pending since February 15, 2019. The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The individual who brought this lawsuit is called the Class Representative, and the entities he sued are called Defendants. The Class Representative, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, is a former participant in the Plans. The Defendants are McKinsey, MIO, and certain unidentified individuals (“Doe Defendants”) with fiduciary functions relating to the Plans. The Class Representative’s claims are described below, and additional information those claims is available at [xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx].
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxxxx, et al. x. XxXxxxxx & Company, Inc., et al, Case No. 1:19-cv-01466- GHW-SN (the “Class Action” or “lawsuit”). It has been pending since February 15, 2019. The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The individual who brought this lawsuit is called the Class Representative, and the entities he sued are called Defendants. The Class Representative, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, is a former participant in the Plans. The Defendants are McKinsey, MIO, and certain unidentified individuals (“Doe Defendants”) with fiduciary functions relating to the Plans. The Class Representative’s claims are described below, and additional information about those claims is available at [xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx].
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxxxx, et al. v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-11620 (D. Mass.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entity and individuals they sued are called the Defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plan. The Defendants are Massachusetts Institute of Technology and certain individuals. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at xxx.XXX000XXxxxxxxxxxXxxx.xxx.
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxxxxx, et al. v. Reliance Trust, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-4444-MHC (N.D. Ga.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entity and individuals they sued are called the Defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plan. The Defendants are Reliance Trust Company, Insperity, Inc., Insperity Holdings, Inc., and Insperity Retirement Services, L.P. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at xxx.Xxxxxxxxx000xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxxxxxxxx, et al., x. Xxxxxxx University, et al, Case No. 16-cv-6525 (S.D.N.Y.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entity and individuals they sued are called the Defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plans. The Defendants are Cornell University, the Retirement Plan Oversight Committee, and Xxxx X. Xxxxxxxx. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at xxx.Xxxxxxx000xXxxxXxxxxxxxxx.xxx.
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxxx et al. v. The Xxxxx Xxxxxxx University, Case No. 1:16-cv-2835 (D. Md.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entity they sued is called the Defendant. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plan. The Defendant is The Xxxxx Xxxxxxx University. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at xxx.XxxxxXxxxxxxXxxxxxxxxx000x.xxx.
The Class Action. The case is called Xxxx Xxxxx, et. al. v. The Boeing Company, et al., Case No. 06-743 (the “Class Action”). It has been pending since September 2006. The Court supervising the case is the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entities they sued are called Defendants. The Class Representatives are participants in the Plan. The Defendants are Boeing and certain alleged fiduciaries to the Plan. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at xxx.XXXXxxxxxxxxx.xxx.
The Class Action. On or after September 7, 2007, a class action, Gxxxxx v. Xxxxx Online, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 07-CV-00785-WO-PTS (the “Action”), was filed in this Court on October 18, 2007 as a class action alleging on behalf of purchasers of Smart Online securities during a defined period of time violations of the federal securities laws. The suit seeks relief on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of Smart Online, Inc. (“Smart Online” or the “Company”) during the Class Period and who were damaged thereby. The class action seeks remedies under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. §78j, and Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5, thereunder arising out of the Defendants’ alleged misconduct. By Order dated June 24, 2008, the Court appointed Mxxx Xxxx Xxxxxxxxxx as Lead Plaintiff and approved her selection of Kxxx Sxxxx & Fxxx LLC2 and Bxxxxx Piven, a Professional Corporation as Lead Counsel for the Class and S. Ranchor Hxxxxx, III as Liaison Counsel for the Class.
