Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces Class Action Lawsuit

Class Action

Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of SearchMedia Holdings Limited between April 1, 2009 and August 20, 2010, inclusive (the "Class Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Complaint").


The Complaint names SearchMedia and certain of the Company's current and former executive officers and directors as defendants. Ideation was a blank check company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware on June 1, 2007, and formed for the purpose of acquiring, through a merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition or other similar business combination, one or more businesses. On April 1, 2009, the Company announced an agreement to purchase SearchMedia International Limited ("SMIL"), a purported nationwide multi-platform media company in China. On October 30, 2009, Ideation completed the acquisition of SMIL (the "Merger") and changed its name to SearchMedia.


The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and/or omitted material facts, in the joint proxy statement and prospectus (the "Joint Proxy/Prospectus") disseminated regarding the Merger, as well as in other public statements issued during the Class Period related to the Merger and SMIL. Additionally, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants failed to disclose material adverse facts about SearchMedia's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) SMIL was improperly recognizing revenue; (2) certain of SMIL's accounts receivable related to sales generated primarily in the in-elevator business were uncollectible, (3) SMIL's financial results during the Class Period were materially overstated; (4) SMIL's financial results were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); (5) SMIL lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (6) as a result of the above, SMIL's financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

Related listings

  •  GOP lawmakers, Ohio AG, want public safety a factor in bail

    GOP lawmakers, Ohio AG, want public safety a factor in bail

    Class Action 05/16/2022

    Judges in Ohio would be required to consider criminal suspects’ threat to public safety when setting bail amounts under both legislation and a proposal for a state constitutional amendment that House Republicans were expected to approve Wednesd...

  • Supreme Court Notebook: Roberts pays tribute to Breyer

    Supreme Court Notebook: Roberts pays tribute to Breyer

    Class Action 04/29/2022

    The fertile mind of Justice Stephen Breyer has conjured a stream of hypothetical questions through the years that have, in the words of a colleague, “befuddled” lawyers and justices alike.Breyer, 83, seemed a bit subdued as he sat through...

  • Appeals court: Illinois counties must end ICE contracts

    Appeals court: Illinois counties must end ICE contracts

    Class Action 01/14/2022

    A federal appeals court has ruled two counties that hold immigrant detainees at local jails must terminate contracts with federal authorities starting Thursday. Leaders in Kankakee and McHenry counties sued over an Illinois law aimed at ending immigr...

Business News

New York Adoption Lawyers Rosin Steinhagen Mendel is a law firm dedicated to serving our clients in New York City. >> read
Chicago Work Accident Lawyers at Krol, Bongiorno & Given have been a leader in the field of workers' compensation law. >> read