February 18, 2015 - The court ordered the authorization of the distribution of the net settlement fund.
February 20, 2014 - The court approved the settlement, entered the orders approving the plan of allocation, the motion for attorneys’ fees and expenses, and dismissed the action with prejudice.

November 15, 2013 - The court preliminarily approved the settlement.

June 13, 2013 - Parties filed a stipulation of settlement.

November 7, 2011 - The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss.

August 26, 2011 - A defendant filed another motion to dismiss the fourth amended complaint.

August 9, 2011 - The court granted the defendant's motion for reconsideration.

August 1, 2011 - A defendant filed a motion for reconsideration.

July 19, 2011 - The court denied the defendants' motions to dismiss.

May 6, 2011 - The defendants filed motions to dismiss the fourth amended complaint.

April 4, 2011 - The lead plaintiffs filed a fourth amended complaint.

February 10, 2011 - The court held a hearing and ruled the July 27, 2010 motions to dismiss denied as moot.

July 27, 2010 - The defendants filed motions to dismiss.

May 28, 2010 - The lead plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint.

April 16, 2010 - The court granted in part the motion to dismiss without prejudice and granted plaintiff leave to amend and in part denied the motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens without prejudice to later submission.

December 16, 2009 - Additional defendants filed motions to dismiss the second amended complaint.

December 14, 2009 - Certain defendants filed motions to dismiss the second amended complaint.

October 29, 2009 - The lead plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint.

September 30, 2009 - The court granted the motion of April 28, 2009 without prejudice and granted plaintiffs leave to amend. The court granted the motion of June 4, 2009 with prejudice.

June 4, 2009 - Another defendant filed a motion to dismiss.

April 28, 2009 -A defendant filed a motion to dismiss.

March 27, 2009 - The lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on behalf of investors who purchased China Expert Technology Inc (OTC: CXTI) common stock between March 31, 2006 to October 1, 2007. The lead plaintiff alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading statements between March 31, 2006 to October 1, 2007.

March 25, 2008 - The lead plaintiffs and lead counsel were appointed.

March 5, 2008 - A plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal dismissing claims against all individual defendants without prejudice. That plaintiff's claim against China Expert Technology Inc remains.

January 22, 2008 - Lead plaintiff motions were filed.

November 21, 2007 - An investor in shares of China Expert Technology Inc (OTC: CXTI) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against China Expert Technology Inc over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between November 14, 2006 to October 1, 2007

The complaint alleges that China Expert Technology Inc knowingly issued materially false financial statements and other misleading statements concerning its business between November 14, 2006 to October 1, 2007. The complaint further claims CXTI issued materially false and misleading statements and omitted to state material facts that rendered their affirmative statements misleading as they related to China Expert Technology Inc’s financial performance, business prospects, and financial condition. As a result of these materially false and misleading statements, the price of China Expert Technology Inc’s securities was artificially inflated to a high of over $8.00 per share. As the truth of China Expert Technology Inc’s materially false and misleading statements entered the market, China Expert Technology Inc’s stock (OTC: CXTI) plummeted to pennies and was even halted by the SEC.