Ana Engativa
Ana Engativa
Contributor 2018-19
Ana is currently a third-year law student at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law (DU). She was born in Colombia and moved to South Florida at the age of 10. She attended the Florida State University and graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in Criminology. Prior to attending law school, Ana worked as a legal assistant for two years before being promoted as a paralegal in a personal injury firm where she handled over 115 cases in the pre-litigation stage.
Ana is a transfer student from the Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law in Davie, FL. Ana was part of the Moot Court Honor Society and she interned with the Honorable Burton C. Conner at the Fourth District Court of Appeals. After transferring to DU, she became a part of the Mediation Team in addition to becoming a contributor to The Race to the Bottom.
Ana has worked in several different areas of law including criminal, appellate, lobbying, immigration, and personal injury. Ana’s legal interests include contract drafting, negotiations, and mergers and acquisitions. She is also currently seeking the Corporate and Commercial Law Certificate at DU.
Outside of law school, Ana enjoys traveling, yoga, hiking, running, reading, and snowboarding. Additionally, she loves to spend time with her two dogs, is an avid Florida State football fan as well as a coffee and cheese enthusiast.
In Desta v. Wins Fin. Holdings Inc. Et. Al., No. 17-cv-02983-CAS(AGRx), 2018 BL 70590 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2018), the United States District Court for the Central District of California denied Wins Finance Holdings Inc. (“Wins”), and Wins Co-CEO Jianming Hao, Co-CEO and COO Renhui Mu, and CFO Junfeng Zhao’s, (collectively the “Defendants”) motion to dismiss Michael Desta’s (“Plaintiff”) complaint for failure to state a claim for securities fraud pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rules 10b– 5(a) and (c) under, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b–5(a) & (c). The court held that the Plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to show the elements of falsity, scienter, loss causation, and reliance under the Act, such that a proper claim was pleaded.