FRT’s Fast Five: Week Ending April 22, 2022

Financial Recovery Technologies Fast Five provides you with the top news in shareholder class actions. Stay up-to-date on the latest developments in settled (U.S./Canada) claims filing opportunities, Antitrust settlements, Global Group Litigation matters and more. For more information, contact your Financial Recovery Technologies representative or email us.

1. Gogo, Investors Reach $17.3 Million Deal in Plane Wi-Fi Lawsuit

Gogo Inc. investors who say the company misled them about problems with its in-flight Wi-Fi products asked a federal judge in Illinois for permission to move froward with a $17.3 million settlement. The cash deal recovers about 8% of the maximum damages available, the in-flight connectivity company’s investors said in a memo filed in support of their preliminary settlement approval in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Investors accuse Gogo of making misleading statements about its then-new antenna-and-satellite-based in-flight Wi-Fi system. The proposed settlement class consists of investors who acquired Gogo common stock, convertible notes, or call options, or wrote put options, from Feb. 27, 2017, through May 4, 2018, and lost money as a result. Click here to read the full article.

2. Bitcoin Mining Biz Hit With Securities Suit Over Supply Issues

Alternative energy bitcoin miner Stronghold Digital Mining Inc. was hit Thursday with a securities class action lawsuit in Manhattan federal court after the company disclosed losses due to failure of its supplier of cryptocurrency mining equipment to deliver products on time. Mark Winter sued Stronghold, along with three of its executives and the underwriters for its October initial public offering, alleging that they failed to properly disclose for the offering that supplier and non-party MinerVa Semiconductor Corp. was likely to miss delivery deadlines, which in turn would hurt the business. Click here to read the full article (subscription may be required).

3. Reform of The UK Prospectus Regime – Update on Securities Litigation Risk

HM Treasury (HMT) has published a response setting out its policy approach to reforming the UK’s prospectus regime, in the biggest shake up since 2005. The response follows the initial consultation published in July 2021. The idea behind these changes is to simplify regulation in this area, as well as facilitating wider participation in the ownership of public companies and improving the quality of information investors receive. From a securities litigation perspective, in light of the ever-evolving statutory and regulatory landscape, it is important issuers continue to monitor the impact of any changes to their disclosure requirements. HMT’s reforms of the UK’s prospectus regime are likely to have a potential impact on claims under s.90 FSMA for liability for prospectuses and listing particulars. Click here to read the full article.

4. France’s Baby Steps Towards Becoming a Group Litigation Forum – the ‘Sanofi’ Ruling

On 5 January 2022, the Paris Judicial Tribunal (Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris) ruled for the first time since group actions were introduced into French law in 2014, that a group action was admissible, and that the defendant was to be held liable. The ruling against Sanofi is the first group action litigation in France in which a company has been held liable for its wrongdoing. However, the idea of France having a fully efficient and operative class action regime à la française, as it was promoted when group actions were introduced in French law in 2014, is to be nuanced. France is certainly conscious of the shortfalls of its current system. Its future planned reform, in light of the EU Directive on representative actions, brings some degree of confidence that victims of large corporations will someday be able to fully recover their losses before French courts without extensive delays. This may, however, take some time. Click here to read the full article.

5. Jurisdiction Update: China – Winds of Change

In December 2021, the first securities “class action” in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) against Kangmei Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Kangmei) and its executives produced a $385M recovery for investors. While the media has extolled this result, non-Chinese investors should temper their expectations. Certainly, the winds of change appear to be blowing in the right direction. The PRC government has been stressing market reforms. But what the government gives it can take away, and investors should be ready to trim their sails accordingly. Click here to read the full article.

Subscribe to FRT’s Quarterly Newsletter

Financial Recovery Technologies’ Shareholder Litigation Insights provides you with the top news in shareholder class actions.  This is your exclusive summary of the latest industry developments related to settled, group, and antitrust actions and recovery opportunities. Click here to subscribe.

Learn More

To learn more about how FRT can help your firm maximize recoveries in shareholder class action settlements, contact us at

About FRT


Founded in 2008, Financial Recovery Technologies (FRT) is the leading technology-based services firm that helps the investment community identify eligibility, file claims and collect funds made available in securities and other class action settlements. Offering the most comprehensive range of claim filing and monitoring services available, we provide best-in-class eligibility analysis, disbursement auditing and client reporting, and deliver the highest level of accuracy, accountability, and transparency available. For more information, go to

This communication and the content found by following any link herein are being provided to you by Financial Recovery Technologies (FRT) for informational purposes only and do not constitute advice. All material presented herein is believed to be reliable but FRT makes no representation or warranty with respect to this communication or such content and expressly disclaims any implied warranty under law. Opinions expressed in this communication may change without prior notice. Firms should always seek legal and financial advice specific to their unique situation and objectives.