The Complaint also asserts that the Company “failed to disclose to the market certain inside information about the Company’s scheme to issue common stock as security for various loans.” Compl. ¶20. A defendant, however, “cannot be alleged to have misrepresented or omitted that which [it] plainly disclosed” in its public filings. Zheng, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59796, at *28. Here, in its 2016 Form 10-K, SAFI disclosed that it had issued shares as “collateral to secure trade finance facility” and set forth several line items concerning the “shares collateral.” RJB Decl. Ex. 2 at pp. 68, F-33, F-38, and F-44. In its 2017 Form 10-K, SAFIprovided updated information, including a summary chart captioned “Changes in Third Party Loan collateralized shares.” Id. Ex. 3 at pp. 92, F-4, F-5, and F-44. While Plaintiffs assert that such disclosures did not comply with a foreign exchange’s rules, there is no allegation that they did not comply with the U.S. securities laws; consequently, there was no actionable omission.
Can someone provide a link to the 30 page? document from Merkur, where Merkur states (a dozen times) that shareholders got hurt due to a lack of disclosure from the company? As I said before, I think Merkur overstepped their boundaries here. No doubt influenced by Fredly. Which of course raises some questions
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.