SEC Charges Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President With Investor Fraud
CEO Elizabeth Holmes has agreed to pay a $500,000 penalty, return the remaining 18.9 million shares she obtained during the fraud, and relinquish her voting control of Theranos.
March 14, 2018 at 01:10 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced Wednesday it has charged Silicon Valley blood-testing company Theranos, its current CEO Elizabeth Holmes, and former President Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani with massive investor fraud.
In a press release, the SEC said the defendants raised more than $700 million from investors “through an elaborate, years-long fraud in which they exaggerated or made false statements about the company's technology, business, and financial performance.”
Theranos and Holmes have agreed to settle the fraud charges against them, according to the SEC. Holmes has agreed to pay a $500,000 penalty, be barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company for 10 years, return the remaining 18.9 million shares she obtained during the fraud, and relinquish her voting control of Theranos, it added.
In a call with reporters, Steven Peikin, co-director of the SEC's Enforcement Division, called the remedy against Holmes “pretty unique.” He also said forcing her to give up control of the company she founded was “particularly meaningful … in Silicon Valley, where the founders of startup companies obviously value the concept of control here.”
Peikin added it is a “good example” of the types of remedies the SEC would seek in similar fraud actions, and consistent with the enforcement principles it laid out near the end of 2017.
The SEC action is the latest twist in Theranos' long fall from grace, which was set off by a string of investigative articles published by The Wall Street Journal in 2015 and 2016 detailing the company's struggles to deliver on the promises of its blood-testing technology.
The separate SEC complaints against Theranos, Holmes and Balwani, respectively, include allegations the company misled investors into thinking it was able to run some 200 blood tests using a small, proprietary analyzer when, in fact, it could run only 12, and ran others using modified, commercially available devices.
The agency also alleges Balwani and Holmes told multiple investors that Theranos' technology had been deployed by the Department of Defense in the battlefield, in Afghanistan, and on military medevac helicopters. In fact, the two were aware, or were “reckless in not knowing,” that this was false, the SEC alleges.
“While Theranos' technology was used in a DOD burn study, it was never deployed by the DOD in the battlefield, in Afghanistan, or on medevac helicopters,” both complaints note. The actions were filed in federal court in San Jose, California. Theranos is based in Palo Alto, California.
Theranos is represented by Thomas Strickland and Christopher Davies of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, while Holmes is represented by John Dwyer at Cooley. Balwani is represented by Jeffrey Coopersmith at Davis Wright Tremaine, the SEC said.
“We believe the enforcement action by the SEC is unwarranted,” Coopersmith said in a statement. “Sunny Balwani accurately represented Theranos to investors to the best of his ability. He believed in the potential and mission of the company and its technology to promote transparency and benefit people by empowering them with access to their own health care information at a low cost.”
In a statement, Theranos noted neither the company nor Holmes admitted or denied any wrongdoing under the settlement. “The company is pleased to be bringing this matter to a close and looks forward to advancing its technology,” the company's directors said.
Peikin told reporters the SEC had not sought to penalize Theranos itself because the company was essentially a “two-person operation” during the relevant period, and because doing so may have only further harmed investors. Holmes and Balwani “were responsible for all of the misconduct that's alleged in our complaint,” he said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTravis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part IV: Deliberations Begin in First Trump Criminal Trial
1 minute readJosh Partington of Snell & Wilmer Is in Fact a Rock Star in the Office (and Out of It)
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Increase in Artificial Intelligence-Related Securities Class Actions
- 2Trump’s DOE Pick Could Spell Trouble for Title IX Enforcement, Higher Ed Funding
- 3Jefferson Doctor Hit With $6.8M Verdict Over Death of 64-Year-Old Cancer Patient
- 4Seven Rules of the Road for Managing Referrals To/From Other Attorneys, Part 1
- 5What Went Wrong With Adeel Mangi's Long, Strange Trip Through the Judicial Nomination Process?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250