Harman International Industries, Incorporated (SEC Fair Fund)
Warning: Illegal string offset 'class' in /homepages/43/d258393870/htdocs/liquidclaims/wp-content/themes/min/Minimal/epanel/custom_functions.php on line 61
Warning: Illegal string offset 'alt' in /homepages/43/d258393870/htdocs/liquidclaims/wp-content/themes/min/Minimal/epanel/custom_functions.php on line 62
Warning: Illegal string offset 'title' in /homepages/43/d258393870/htdocs/liquidclaims/wp-content/themes/min/Minimal/epanel/custom_functions.php on line 63
Harman International Industries, Securities Settlement
The lawsuit was settled for $6,228,728 in cash. The following is a summary of the proceedings in this lawsuit: ‘The Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission commenced this action by filing a Complaint against Waleed Khalid Al-Braikan as Representative of the Heirs of Hazem Al-Braikan (the Estate), KIPCO Asset Management, and Al-Raya Investment Company (Al-Raya) on July 23, 2009. By separate orders, the Court entered final judgments against Al-Raya, the Estate and Relief Defendant on August 9, 2010. As required by the final judgments, total payments of approximately $6,228,728.61, plus accumulated interest, were paid to the Clerk of the Court and placed into an interest-bearing account with the Court Registry Investment System (CRIS). In this action, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission), alleged that Hazem Al-Braikan (Al-Braikan), a Kuwaiti financial advisor, created and disseminated two hoax press releases about nonexistent tenders offer for Textron, Inc. (Textron) and Harman International Industries (Harman), that artificially inflated the companies stock prices on April 9, 2009 and July 20, 2009 respectively. Together, the two hoaxes generated profits of $6,228,728.61 for Al-Braikan, companies he controlled, his clients and friends. Al-Braikan conduct allegedly violated the anti-fraud provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Section 10(b) and Rule 10(b)-5 thereunder. Al-Braikan passed away on July 26, 2009; consequently, the Estate was named as a Defendant in this action.’