Crypto Industry Increases Lobbying Efforts in Washington

With Blockchain technology becoming more prevalent worldwide, particularly as it relates to cryptocurrencies and initial coin offerings (“ICOs”), regulators continue their struggle to develop appropriate legislation that embodies an ideal balance between regulation and innovation. In an effort to help shape these new regulations and encourage legislation that is favorable to the crypto industry, many crypto leaders have increased their presence in Washington, primarily through lobbying efforts. (Lydia Beyoud, Bloomberg Law). In fact, lobbying efforts increased significantly during 2018 with larger crypto groups spending six-figures per quarter on lobbying alone, and crypto-specific companies filing twice as many lobbying reports in 2018 as 2017. (Id.).

Read More
As the Cryptocurrency Industry Grows, Will the Amount of Fraud and Lawsuits Grow with It?

Cryptocurrency and the technology it relies on, blockchain, revolutionized both the tech and finance world. A blockchain is a distributed record of transactions, usually managed by a peer-to-peer network of computers that validates the transactions. With companies racing to take advantage of this new industry, it was only a matter of time before some companies would try to take advantage of unsuspecting investors. This is what happened with a company called Compcoin LLC. (“Compcoin”).

Read More
Shareholder Complaint in Plumbers & Steamfitters Local 773 Pension Fund v. Danske Bank A/S

In Plumbers & Steamfitters Local 773 Pension Fund v. Danske Bank A/S, No. 19-cv-235 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2019), Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Pension Fund (“Plaintiffs”) filed a class action suit against Danske Bank A/S (“Defendant”). The complaint was filed on behalf of all purchasers of Defendant’s American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”) between January 9, 2014 and October 23, 2018. Plaintiffs claimed Defendant engaged in a series of untrue and misleading statements in response to allegations of illicit banking activities stemming from Defendant’s Estonia branch during the class period, thereby violating Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“the Act”).

Read More
Attack on Ethereum Classic Highlights a Vulnerability

On January 7th Coinbase paused trading on Ethereum Classic (ETC) after it fell victim to a 51% attack. The attack resulted in over $500,000 of ETC being spent twice (Olga Kharif, Bloomberg Law). To appreciate what this means for the ETC mining community, two things must be understood: Hash rates and a 51% attack.

“Hash rates” or “hash power” refers to the total computing power of a decentralized network. Proof of Work (PoW) blockchains, like Bitcoin and Ethereum, are driven by miners “hashing,” which is essentially solving complicated math problems. (Bisade Asolo, MyCryptopedia).

Read More
Akorn, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi AG: Suit for Specific Performance of Merger Agreement

In Akorn, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi AG (Del. Ch. 2018 WL 4719347), the plaintiff pharmaceutical company (“Akorn”) brought suit against Fresenius seeking specific performance of its signed merger agreement. Fresenius argued it was permitted to terminate the merger agreement because Akorn’s actions, performance, and misrepresentations following execution of the agreement constituted a materially adverse effect (“MAE”) under the terms of the merger agreement and thus excused Fresenius’s obligation to perform. The court held that Fresenius legally terminated its merger agreement with Akorn because: (1) Akorn made material misrepresentations with regard to its business operations and the status of its regulatory compliance before the closing date, (2) Akorn did not materially comply with or perform its obligations under the merger agreement prior to the effective closing date, and (3) Akorn suffered a general MAE that allowed Fresenius to terminate the agreement.

Read More
How did the Government Shutdown Affect the Lyft and Uber IPOs? What are the Future Implications?

The recent government shutdown prevented privately held companies from submitting their requests to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to offer their shares to the public. The SEC is responsible for reviewing a company’s registration documents and financial data necessary for initial public offerings (“IPOs”). Prior to the shutdown, the SEC urged companies to file accelerated registration statements so that they could be approved. (Associated Press, New York Times). Although companies may go public without SEC approved registration statements, the company would certainly be subject to SEC scrutiny upon the government’s reopening. (Rob Crilly, The National). Consequently, most companies decided to wait for approval from the SEC prior to their IPOs being made available.

Read More