In The Aftermath Of The White Paper, Alibaba Was Subjected To Class Action In The United States.

After the announcement of the white paper of SAIC, Alibaba The group has been subject to class action in the United States on suspicion of "concealing supervision by the authorities" and 7 law firms have intervened. Some lawyers believe that the SAIC's "white paper" can still be used as evidence.

7 US law firms have been involved in the investigation.

Since January 27th, Taobao official micro-blog questioned the results of the SAIC sampling survey, which has attracted wide attention. Alibaba And the SAIC's "trick" came to an end, but Alibaba still faces more problems.

According to foreign media reports yesterday, Alibaba was subjected to class action in the United States and was accused of issuing misleading statements and concealing the investigation under supervision. The US law firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announced on Friday that Alibaba and some of its executives will be sent to the federal court of New York on suspicion of violating the securities law.

The company believes that Alibaba executives met with SAIC officials before the listing of Alibaba, and the regulator suggested that the company might have illegal business practices, but Alibaba did not disclose relevant information. In the minutes of the SAIC meeting, we mentioned Ali's Taobao selling fake products. According to foreign media reports, there are 7 American law firms that will be involved in the investigation.

Foreign media quoted Alibaba spokesman's response, saying: "Alibaba believes that the accusation in the lawsuit lacks legal basis, and the company will actively defend." Ali group responsible person yesterday told the Beijing News reporters that the company did not declare the above events.

Recently, Alibaba shares in the US listed on 2014 were hit hard. The Alibaba issue price of $68, the first day of listing opened up to $92.7. The closing price in January 26, 2015 was $103.99, and by January 30th, the closing price was $89.08, and the total market value of the four trading days evaporated about 36 billion 753 million US dollars.

　 Lawyers said the SAIC had no right to decide the validity of the white paper.

In January 28th, the SAIC announced a pair. Alibaba The "white paper" of the group's administrative guidance says that Alibaba has 5 major problems. However, in January 30th, the SAIC said that the above white paper was actually a record of the administrative guidance meeting and had no legal effect. On the same day, Zhang Mao, director general of the State Administration for Industry and commerce, met with the chairman of the board of directors of Alibaba, Ma Yun. The two sides agreed to jointly crack down on counterfeit goods and safeguard the rights and interests of consumers.

Hao Junbo, a Chinese lawyer, publicly released the Alibaba investor's class action order in January 30th. Hao Junbo told the Beijing News reporters yesterday that the SAIC has no right to decide that the white paper has no legal effect. The core question is whether Taobao's selling and other issues are facts. He believes that Ali is suspected of "not disclosing adverse information to investors".

According to Hao Junbo, what lawyers are doubting is whether Alibaba and some officials or directors violated the US Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Hao Junbo said, at present, investors have entrusted it to litigation.

At the same time, Zhang Yuanzhong, chief partner of Beijing law firm, told the Beijing News reporters that although the white paper does not have legal effect, the contents of the white paper will still play the role of evidence. Counsel can submit it to the United States Court and conduct an investigation in accordance with the white paper's thinking. Zhang Yuanzhong believes that if the contents of the white paper do happen before Ali's listing, Ali may be suspected of false statements and fraudulent listing, which will face serious penalties from the US regulators.

　 background

Several stocks have been subject to class action.

According to foreign media reports, the "siege" Alibaba has 7 laws. Inquiring about the cases that the law firms have represented, it is found that in recent years, they have initiated records of litigation.

The companies surveyed or prosecuted by these firms involved PetroChina, New Oriental, Focus Media, Lanting Pavilion gathering power, century interconnection, jumei.com, amber education, and Long Wei petroleum. The final outcome of these cases is mostly settled by reconciliation monks.

In July 2012, 7 law firms in the United States launched a class action lawsuit against New Oriental, accusing the New Oriental of issuing false and misleading information, including financial statements exaggerating asset size or cash flow. There is no definite conclusion yet.

In May 2014, jumei.com was listed on the NYSE, and 7 months later, PomerantzLLP was launched in a class action lawsuit, accusing jumei.com and its specific executives of issuing misleading and misleading statements to the investing public. In the next 4 months, jumei.com's market value shrank by more than 60%, but the case has not yet been conclusive.

The gathering of Lanting Pavilion is one of the few companies that openly admit that there are false and misleading statements. In August 2013, 4 law firms in the United States launched class action lawsuits, accusing Lanting Pavilion of making false and misleading statements. In September 2014, the Lanting Pavilion group announced a settlement of class action with $1 million 550 thousand. The new Beijing News

　 Chronicle of events

In January 27th, Taobao official micro-blog forwarded a long micro-blog entitled "the voice of a post-80s Taobao network". It questioned the existence of problems in the sampling and sampling procedures of the targeted monitoring of online transactions in the second half of 2014, issued by SAIC in January 23rd. The above monitoring results show that Taobao has the lowest rate of genuine products, only 37.25%.

In January 27th, a spokesman for the State Administration for Industry and Commerce said, "targeted monitoring of online trading commodities is an important way of assessing market risks and warning against illegal operations". The SAIC has been adhering to the principle of administration according to law and conducting network market supervision and law enforcement.

In January 28th, the SAIC official website issued a white paper on the administrative guidance of Alibaba, pointing out that there are 5 major problems. Subsequently, Taobao issued a statement saying that Liu Hongliang, director of the Internet Supervision Bureau of the General Administration of industry and commerce, "emotional law enforcement", decided to formally lodge a complaint with the SAIC. The white paper was withdrawn that night.

In January 30th, the SAIC said that the above white paper was actually a record of the administrative guidance meeting and had no legal effect. Zhang Mao, director general of the State Administration for Industry and commerce, met with the chairman of the board of directors of Alibaba, Ma Yun, and Ma Yun said that Alibaba will cooperate with the government in cracking down on counterfeits and strengthen routine online inspections and spot checks.