Latest news with #BLB&G
Business Wire
25-07-2025
- Business
- Business Wire
Shareholder Alert: Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP Announces the Filing of Securities Class Action Lawsuit Against Apple Inc.
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Today, prominent investor rights law firm Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP ('BLB&G') filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California alleging violations of the federal securities laws by Apple Inc. ('Apple' or the 'Company') and certain of the Company's current and former senior executives (collectively, 'Defendants'). The action is brought on behalf of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Apple common stock between June 10, 2024, and June 9, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'). This case is related to a previously filed securities class action pending against Apple captioned Tucker v. Apple Inc., No. 5:25-cv-05197 (N.D. Cal.). The case is captioned City of Coral Springs Police Officers' Pension Plan v. Apple Inc., No. 25-cv-06252 (N.D. Cal.). The complaint is based on an extensive investigation and a careful evaluation of the merits of this case. A copy of the complaint is available on BLB&G's website by clicking here. Apple is a multinational technology company most well-known for its iPhone. It also sells other smart technology products and offers a variety of integrated software and services through the operation of various platforms, including the App Store. Since 2011, iPhones and other Apple smart devices have contained software for the Company's digital personal assistant, called 'Siri.' In recent years, a number of Apple's competitors have introduced artificial intelligence ('AI') capabilities, which put pressure on Apple to incorporate generative-AI technology into its iPhones and especially to introduce advanced AI-based Siri features. In 2020, Epic Games, Inc. ('Epic') sued Apple, challenging Apple's restrictions on app developers' ability to communicate with, and direct consumers to, purchasing mechanisms outside of those offered by Apple's App Store (the 'Epic Action'). Apple takes a 30% commission on all revenues generated from its App Store, and Epic's efforts to open other avenues for app-related payments posed a threat to one of Apple's major revenue streams. After the companies initially went to trial in 2021, the court presiding over the action issued a 180-page order enjoining Apple's 'anti-steering' rules, which the court found were anti-competitive (the 'Epic Injunction'). This injunction went into effect on January 17, 2024, after Apple had exhausted its appeals. The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made misrepresentations and omissions that fall into two categories: (i) statements regarding the launch of new generative-AI based Siri features; and (ii) statements concerning Apple's compliance with the Epic Injunction, including statements relating to any impacts on revenue from this compliance. Throughout the Class Period, starting with the Company's 2024 Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple represented to investors that the Company would be rolling out a number of AI-supported features for Siri in the first half of 2025, promising that 'over the next year' or 'in the coming months,' Siri would gain AI functionality that would enable it to 'take hundreds of new actions in and across Apple and third-party apps,' and 'deliver intelligence that's tailored to the user and their on-device information.' The Company also repeatedly represented that it had implemented a plan to comply with the Epic Injunction. In truth, Apple faced significant undisclosed challenges in developing the generative AI-enabled Siri, including meaningful quality challenges, that would make it unable to rollout the features in the first half of 2025 as had been stated. Additionally, the Company willfully violated the Epic Injunction by implementing new measures to prevent developers from deploying competitive alternatives to in-app purchases. Apple's defenses and justification for those measures were reverse-engineered to hide its anti-competitive motives from the court and investors. The truth began to emerge during a series of evidentiary hearings held by the court in the Epic Action from February 24 through February 26, 2025, in response to a motion from Epic seeking to enforce the injunction and hold Apple in civil contempt. On February 25, 2025, a senior Apple employee testified that the impact on the Company's finances was a key factor in its decision to implement a particular anti-competitive aspect of its 'compliance plan,' and that eliminating this would cost the Company 'hundreds of millions if not billions,' in App Store revenue. As a result of these disclosures, the price of Apple common stock declined by $6.68 per share, or 2.7%. The truth was further revealed on March 7, 2025, when an Apple spokesperson was quoted by multiple news outlets, disclosing that the launch of the Siri generative-AI features would be delayed. Specifically, the spokesperson stated that '[i]t's going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year.' In response to this news, the price of Apple common stock declined by $11.59 per share, or 4.8%, the following trading day. The following week, on March 12, 2025, Morgan Stanley published a report, stating that '[t]he delayed rollout of a more advanced Siri means Apple will have fewer features to accelerate iPhone upgrade rates in FY26.' The report presented evidence that around 50% of iPhone owners who did not upgrade to an iPhone 16 said that the delayed Apple Intelligence rollout impacted their decision not to upgrade. As a result of these disclosures, the price of Apple common stock declined by $11.16 per share, or 5.1% over the following two trading sessions. Then, on April 3, 2025, The Wall Street Journal published an article criticizing Apple for overpromising on its AI capabilities and chiding the Company that it 'shouldn't announce products until they're sure they can deliver them.' On this news, the price of Apple common stock declined by $20.70 per share, or 9.2%. On April 30, 2025, the court presiding over the Epic Action issued an order finding Apple in willful violation of the Epic Injunction, holding Apple in civil contempt, and referring the matter to the United States Attorney for the Northern District of California to investigate whether criminal contempt proceedings were appropriate. Finally, on June 9, 2025, Apple held its 2025 Worldwide Developer Conference where it notably failed to announce any updates regarding advanced Siri features beyond that the Company 'needed more time to reach a high quality bar.' Industry commentators were underwhelmed with this news, with CNN commenting that 'it's unlikely that any of the announcements made at Monday's event will change the perception that Apple is behind its competitors in AI.' These disclosures caused the price of Apple common stock to decline by $2.47 per share, or 1.2%. The filing of this action does not alter the previously established deadline to seek appointment as Lead Plaintiff. Pursuant to the June 20, 2025 notice published in connection with the Tucker action, under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Apple securities during the Class Period may, no later than August 19, 2025, seek to be appointed as Lead Plaintiff for the Class. Any member of the proposed Class may seek to serve as Lead Plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain a member of the proposed Class. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Scott R. Foglietta of BLB&G at 212-554-1903, or via e-mail at BLB&G is widely recognized worldwide as a leading law firm advising institutional investors on issues related to corporate governance, shareholder rights, and securities litigation. Since its founding in 1983, BLB&G has built an international reputation for excellence and integrity and pioneered the use of the litigation process to achieve precedent-setting governance reforms. Unique among its peers, BLB&G has obtained several of the largest and most significant securities recoveries in history, recovering over $40 billion on behalf of defrauded investors. More information about the firm can be found online at
Business Wire
13-05-2025
- Business
- Business Wire
Shareholder Alert: Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP Announces the Filing of Securities Class Action Lawsuit Against Elevance Health, Inc.
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Today, prominent investor rights law firm Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP ('BLB&G') filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana alleging violations of the federal securities laws by Elevance Health, Inc. ('Elevance' or the 'Company') and certain of the Company's current senior executives (collectively, 'Defendants'). The action is brought on behalf of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Elevance common stock between April 18, 2024, and October 16, 2024, inclusive (the 'Class Period'). The case is captioned Miller v. Elevance Health, Inc., No. 25-cv-923 (S.D. Ind.). The complaint is based on an extensive investigation and a careful evaluation of the merits of this case. A copy of the complaint is available on BLB&G's website by clicking here. Elevance is a healthcare company that, among other things, provides health insurance plans to a variety of markets. This includes contracting with states to administer Medicaid benefits for eligible beneficiaries. Elevance prices premiums based on the historical and expected cost to provide benefits. Among other things, the cost of providing health benefits to members is driven by the level of care a patient requires, often referred to as 'acuity,' and the members' utilization of the health benefits. States regularly conduct an eligibility review to 'redetermine' whether Medicaid beneficiaries still qualify for coverage. In response to the COVID pandemic, the federal government temporarily disallowed states from redetermining the eligibility of Medicaid recipients. The moratorium on redetermination was lifted in 2023, and states resumed the redetermination process. Most states expected to finish the redetermination process by mid-2024. The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants represented to investors that they were closely monitoring cost trends associated with the redetermination process and that the premium rates Elevance was negotiating with states were sufficient to address the risk and cost profiles of those patients staying on Medicaid programs. While Defendants acknowledged that Medicaid expenses were rising, they repeatedly assured investors that this was adequately reflected in the Company's guidance for the year. In truth, the redeterminations were causing the acuity and utilization of Elevance's Medicaid members to rise significantly, as the members being removed from Medicaid programs were, on average, healthier than those who remained eligible for the programs. This shift was occurring to a degree that was not reflected in Elevance's rate negotiations with the states or in its financial guidance for 2024. The truth began to emerge on July 17, 2024, when the Company revealed that it was now 'expecting second-half utilization to increase in Medicaid.' In response to this disclosure, the price of Elevance common stock declined by $32.21 per share, or 5.8%. However, Defendants continued to make false, reassuring statements to investors concerning the extent of the cost increase and how that was accounted for in the Company's full year guidance. The truth was further revealed on October 17, 2024, when Elevance announced its financial results for the third quarter of 2024, revealing that the Company had missed consensus earnings per share ('EPS') expectations for the quarter by $1.33, or 13.7%, 'due to elevated medical costs in [its] Medicaid business.' Elevance further revealed that it was lowering EPS guidance for 2024 from $37.20 to $33.00, or 11.3%, as it expected these Medicaid issues to continue. These disclosures caused the price of Elevance common stock to decline by another $52.61 per share, or 10.6%. If you wish to serve as Lead Plaintiff for the Class, you must file a motion with the Court no later than July 11, 2025, which is the first business day on which the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana is open that is 60 days after the publication date of May 12, 2025. Any member of the proposed Class may seek to serve as Lead Plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain a member of the proposed Class. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Scott R. Foglietta of BLB&G at 212-554-1903, or via e-mail at BLB&G is widely recognized worldwide as a leading law firm advising institutional investors on issues related to corporate governance, shareholder rights, and securities litigation. Since its founding in 1983, BLB&G has built an international reputation for excellence and integrity and pioneered the use of the litigation process to achieve precedent-setting governance reforms. Unique among its peers, BLB&G has obtained several of the largest and most significant securities recoveries in history, recovering over $40 billion on behalf of defrauded investors. More information about the firm can be found online at
Associated Press
05-02-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Shareholder Alert: Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP Announces the Filing of Securities Class Action Lawsuit Against GSK plc
Today, prominent investor rights law firm Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP ('BLB&G') filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania alleging violations of the federal securities laws by GSK plc ('GSK' or the 'Company') and certain of the Company's current and former executives (collectively, 'Defendants'). The action is brought on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased GSK American Depositary Receipts ('ADRs') between February 5, 2020, and August 14, 2022, inclusive (the 'Class Period'). BLB&G filed this action on behalf of its client, Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund, and the case is captioned Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. GSK plc, No. 25-cv-618 (E.D. Pa.). The complaint is based on an extensive investigation and a careful evaluation of the merits of this case. A copy of the complaint is available on BLB&G's website by clicking here. GSK's Alleged Fraud GSK is a global pharmaceutical company that develops, manufactures, and markets vaccines and medicines worldwide. In the 1980s, a predecessor company to GSK launched a treatment for heartburn and acid reflux: ranitidine, under the brand name Zantac. Over the next four decades, Zantac was used by millions of patients and generated billions of dollars for GSK. In 2019, independent laboratory Valisure found NDMA, a cancer-causing poison, in 'every batch of every [Zantac] medication' that it tested. Valisure reported these results to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ('FDA') and to the public. In September and October 2019, GSK suspended its distribution of Zantac and initiated a voluntary recall. In April 2020, the FDA requested that manufacturers cease selling Zantac and any generic alternatives. Tens of thousands of cancer-stricken patients filed personal injury and product liability lawsuits against GSK in the years that followed. Many of these were unified into a multidistrict litigation proceeding. The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants represented to investors that GSK removed Zantac from the market '[b]ased on information available at the time and correspondence with regulators,' and that GSK was 'continuing with investigations into the potential source of NDMA.' Defendants also assured investors that 'GSK, the FDA, and the EMA [European Medicines Agency] have all independently concluded that there is no evidence of a causal association between ranitidine therapy and the development of cancer in patients,' findings that were 'consistent with other ranitidine data published prior to 2019.' Finally, Defendants claimed that they could not 'quantify or reliably estimate the liability' GSK could face from Zantac-related legal proceedings. These representations were materially false or misleading and caused GSK ADRs to trade at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. In truth, GSK was fully aware of the source of NDMA and had been for nearly 40 years before withdrawing Zantac from the market. Furthermore, Defendants' representations about their ability to 'quantify or reliably estimate the liability' deceived investors, who did not know that GSK had for decades concealed an internal study that implicated the Company's liability to Zantac users. The truth began to emerge on August 10, 2022, when a Deutsche Bank report alerted the market that it seemed 'very possible' that GSK and other Zantac distributors 'will incur the risk of some degree of shared liability, with the only real questions being what the magnitude of liability may be.' While GSK had repeatedly told investors that scientific research did not support a correlation between Zantac and cancer, the Deutsche Bank report forecasted that total liability could be between $5 billion and $10 billion. Then, on August 15, 2022, GSK admitted that it could, in fact, provide guidance and that its liability exposure was between $1 billion and $10 billion. As a result of these disclosures, the price of GSK ADRs declined precipitously. If you wish to serve as Lead Plaintiff for the Class, you must file a motion with the Court no later than April 7, 2025, which is the first business day on which the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is open that is 60 days after the publication date of February 4, 2025. Any member of the proposed Class may seek to serve as Lead Plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain a member of the proposed Class. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Scott R. Foglietta of BLB&G at 212-554-1903, or via e-mail at [email protected]. About BLB&G BLB&G is widely recognized worldwide as a leading law firm advising institutional investors on issues related to corporate governance, shareholder rights, and securities litigation. Since its founding in 1983, BLB&G has built an international reputation for excellence and integrity and pioneered the use of the litigation process to achieve precedent-setting governance reforms. Unique among its peers, BLB&G has obtained several of the largest and most significant securities recoveries in history, recovering over $40 billion on behalf of defrauded investors. More information about the firm can be found online at Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP 1251 Avenue of the Americas, 44th Floor New York, New York 10020 (212) 554-1903 SOURCE: Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP Copyright Business Wire 2025. PUB: 02/04/2025 08:40 PM/DISC: 02/04/2025 08:40 PM
