News Article | May 17, 2017
SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP notifies BlackRock ETF investors that on April 27, 2017, the San Francisco Superior Court entered an order in the investor case against BlackRock Inc. (NYSE:BLK), iShares Trust and their affiliates. The case is brought on behalf of investors of BlackRock iShares Exchange Traded Funds (“ETFs”) who used market or stop loss orders and suffered losses when the underlying value of the assets in BlackRock ETFs disengaged from the ETF price during the August 24, 2015 ETF Flash Crash. The Court order finds that plaintiffs have stated a claim pursuant to Section 11 of the 1933 Securities Act for failure to disclose the risks of using market and stop loss orders, and for misleading investors on the tradability and liquidity of BlackRock ETFs. The Court has reserved for future determination whether articles in the press concerning these risks were “clouded” by BlackRock’s actions and statements to the contrary. The Court has scheduled a hearing for June 15, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. to discuss resolution of these and other issues, including whether ETF shares can be traced to any registration statement once traded in the market. Plaintiffs’ counsel is investigating what BlackRock told investors and their advisors concerning the risk of using market or stop-loss orders with ETFs, and what investors and their advisors who used these orders knew or understood about these risks. The potential class includes those who purchased iShares ETFs between June 16, 2013 and August 24, 2015 (the “Class Period”) and sold their iShares ETFs on August 24, 2015 pursuant to a market or stop-loss order, and were damaged thereby. If you are an investor who fits this description, an investment advisor, or other person with knowledge or information concerning these issues, contact Plaintiffs’ counsel at https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/blackrock-ishares-etf-august-24-2015-flash-crash-litigation or contact Reed Kathrein, who is leading the firm’s effort, by calling 510-725-3000 or emailing by emailing iShares@hbsslaw.com. A copy of the First Amended Complaint can be found here and the order can be found here. The ticker symbols for the ETFs involved include: VIG, SDY, DGRO, HDV, IYY, IFEU, REET, IFGL, IDV, JKD, JKE, JKF, JKG, JKH, JKI, JKJ, JKK, JKL, REM, DSI, KLD, IFNA, FTY, REZ, IYT, ITA, IYM, IAI, IYK, IYC, IYE, IYG, IYF, IYH, IHF, ITB, IYJ, IAK, IHI, IEO, IEZ, IHE, IYR, IAT, IYW, IYZ, IDU, AIA, IJH, ITOT, IUSG, IUSV, EMIF, IEV, IOO, ICLN, RXI, KXI, IXC, IXG, IXJ, EXI, IGF, MXI, IXN, IXP, WOOD, JXI, IWC, IBB, IWB, IWF, IWD, IWM, IWO, IWN, IWV, IWR, IWP, IWS, IWL, IWY, IWX, OEF, IVW, IVE, IJK, IJJ, IJT, IJS, PFF, VTI, VEA, VTV, VIG, VUG, VGK, EFA, SPY, VOO, GLD, AGG, VWO, QQQ, VNQ, VEA, LQD. Hagens Berman is a national investor-rights law firm headquartered in Seattle, Washington with offices in 10 cities. The Firm represents investors, whistleblowers, workers and consumers in complex litigation. More about the Firm and its successes can be found at www.hbsslaw.com. For the latest news visit our newsroom or follow us on Twitter at @classactionlaw.
Wilts H.,Wuppertal Institute for Climate |
Dehoust G.,Oeko - Institute e.V. |
Jepsen D.,Okopol |
Science of the Total Environment | Year: 2013
Several studies in Germany aimed at the development of a sound database on existing waste prevention measures by public bodies at the local, regional and federal levels. These results are the starting point for the creation of a national prevention program, which has to be presented by all European Member States until the end of 2013 - due to the revised European Waste Framework Directive.Based on this empirical foundation, this paper draws conclusions with regard to drivers and barriers for eco-innovations in the field of waste prevention. The analysis shows that an optimized adaptation of information on waste prevention to the needs of specific target groups is still missing but could be a relevant driver. With regard to barriers the results of the study show that waste prevention is by no means always a win-win-situation. Institutional frameworks are missing to coordinate the different interests and for the exchange of experiences that could help to realize learning effects regarding innovation approaches. © 2013.
Rettenmaier N.,IFEU |
Koppen S.,IFEU |
Gartner S.O.,IFEU |
Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining | Year: 2010
Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology is increasingly used to determine the potential environmental impacts of biofuels and bioenergy. This paper presents the outcomes of screening LCAs of 13 future energy crops for Europe summarizing the results of the EC-funded project 4F CROPS - Future Crops for Food, Feed, Fiber and Fuel. For analysis, these dedicated energy crops - representing seven environmental zones in Europe - are combined with a multitude of processing and utilization options, resulting in 120 different biofuel and bioenergy chains. Compared to fossil fuels and energy carriers, all biofuel and bioenergy chains show environmental advantages in terms of life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but mostly disadvantages regarding other environmental impact categories. Quantitative results vary widely across environmental zones, depending on crop species, agricultural inputs, and yield. Moreover, coproduct accounting and coproduct utilization, as well as the agricultural and fossil reference system play an important role. In view of environmental advantages and disadvantages, subjective trade-offs are required between the environmental impact categories. If saving GHG emissions is given the highest environmental priority, combined heat and power generation from herbaceous lignocellulosic crops is the most efficient option in terms of land use, provided that the biomass is cultivated on surplus agricultural land, thus avoiding indirect land-use change. © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.