Latest news with #FEDERALSECURITIESLAWS
Business Wire
3 days ago
- Business
- Business Wire
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a Leading Securities Fraud Law Firm Encourages Red Cat Holdings, Inc. (RCAT) Investors To Inquire About Securities Fraud Class Action
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a leading national shareholder rights law firm, announces that a securities fraud class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Red Cat Holdings, Inc. ('Red Cat' or the 'Company') (NASDAQ: RCAT) securities between , inclusive (the 'Class Period'). Red Cat investors have until July 22, 2025 to file a lead plaintiff motion. IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR RED CAT HOLDINGS, INC. (RCAT) INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS What Happened? In March 2022, Red Cat announced that its subsidiary Teal Drones, Inc. ('Teal') had been selected to compete in Tranche 2 of the U.S. Army's Short Range Reconnaissance Program of Record (the 'SRR Program'). On July 27, 2023, Red Cat released its fiscal year 2023 financial results and revealed that its Salt Lake City Facility could only produce 100 drones per month and that construction of the facility was only 'substantially completed' and, while it could potentially reach a production capacity of one thousand drones per month over the next two to three years, it would require additional capital investments. On this news, Red Cat's stock price fell $0.10, or 8.9%, to close at $1.02 per share on July 28, 2023, thereby injuring investors. Then, on September 23, 2024, Red Cat released its first quarter fiscal 2025 financial results, missing consensus estimates and disclosing that it had spent 'the past four months . . . retooling [the Salt Lake City Facility] and preparing for high volume production[,]' while admitting that a 'pause in manufacturing of Teal 2 and building our Army prototypes impacted Teal 2 sales' because it 'couldn't produce and sell Teal 2 units while retooling [its] factory.' On this news, Red Cat's stock price fell $0.80, or 25.3%, over two consecutive trading days to close at $2.36 per share on September 25, 2024. Then, on November 19, 2024, Red Cat announced that it had won the SRR contract, stating that it was worth potentially hundreds of millions of dollars. However, on January 16, 2025, Kerrisdale Capital published a report alleging, among other things, that Red Cat had overstated that value of the SRR Contract and that it was worth approximately $20-25 million, based on U.S. Army budget documents. On this news, Red Cat's stock price fell $2.35, or 21.5%, over two consecutive trading days to close at $8.56 per share on January 17, 2025, thereby injuring investors further. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) the Salt Lake City Facility's production capacity, and Defendants' progress in developing the same, was overstated; (2) the overall value of the SRR Contract was overstated; and (3) as a result, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Red Cat securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 22, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq., Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150, Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Business Wire
3 days ago
- Business
- Business Wire
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a Leading Securities Fraud Law Firm Encourages Organon & Co. (OGN) Investors To Inquire About Securities Fraud Class Action
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a leading national shareholder rights law firm, announces that a securities fraud class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Organon & Co. ('Organon' or the 'Company') (NYSE: OGN) securities between October 31, 2024 to April 30, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'). Organon investors have until July 22, 2025 to file a lead plaintiff motion. IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR ORGANON & CO. (OGN) INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS What Happened? On May 1, 2025, Organon released its first quarter 2025 financial results, announcing that management had reset the Company's dividend payout, from $0.28 to $0.02 and would 'redirect those funds to debt reduction.' On this news, Organon's stock price fell $3.48, or 26.9%, to close at $9.45 per share on May 1, 2025, thereby injuring investors. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) Organon's optimistic reports of the dividend payout as the Company's 'number one priority,' were offset by Organon's newly implemented debt reduction strategy, thus, leading to a drastic decrease – over 70% – of the quarterly dividend; (2) Organon planned to prioritize debt reduction following the Company's acquisition of Dermavant; and (3) as a result, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Organon securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 22, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150 Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Business Wire
6 days ago
- Business
- Business Wire
Deadline Alert: DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. (DV) Investors Who Lost Money Urged to Contact Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP About Securities Fraud Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP reminds investors of the upcoming July 21, 2025 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. ('DoubleVerify' or the 'Company') (NYSE: DV) common stock between , inclusive (the 'Class Period'). IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR DOUBLEVERIFY INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS. What Happened? On May 7, 2024, DoubleVerify released its first quarter 2024 financial results and reduced its 2024 revenue guidance, disclosing that there had been a pullback in customer spending on advertising. On this news, DoubleVerify's stock price fell $11.79, or 38.6%, to close at $18.78 per share on May 8, 2024, thereby injuring investors. Then, on February 27, 2025, DoubleVerify reported lower-than-expected fourth quarter 2024 sales and earnings due in part to reduced customer spending. The Company also disclosed that the shift of ad dollars from open exchanges to closed platforms was having a negative impact on the Company. On this news, DoubleVerify's stock price fell $7.83, or 36%, to close at $13.90 per share on February 28, 2025. Then, on March 28, 2025, Adalytics Research, LLC published a report alleging, among other things, that DoubleVerify's web advertisement verification and fraud protection services were ineffective and that its customers were regularly billed for ad impressions served to bots. The same day, The Wall Street Journal reported that DoubleVerify regularly missed detection of nonhuman traffic despite the Company's claims that it helps brands avoid serving ads to nonhuman bot accounts. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) DoubleVerify's customers were shifting their ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the Company's technological capabilities were limited and competed directly with native tools provided by platforms like Meta Platforms and Amazon; (2) DoubleVerify's ability to monetize on its Activation Services was limited because the development of its technology for closed platforms was significantly more expensive and time-consuming than disclosed to investors; (3) DoubleVerify's Activation Services in connection with certain closed platforms would take several years to monetize; (4) DoubleVerify's competitors were better positioned to incorporate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, which impaired DoubleVerify's ability to compete effectively and adversely impacted the Company's profits; (5) DoubleVerify systematically overbilled its customers for ad impressions served to declared bots operating out of known data center server farms; (6) DoubleVerify's risk disclosures were materially false and misleading because they characterized adverse facts that had already materialized as mere possibilities; and (7) as a result, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired DoubleVerify securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 21, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq., Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150, Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Business Wire
6 days ago
- Business
- Business Wire
Deadline Alert: UroGen Pharma Ltd. (URGN) Investors Who Lost Money Urged To Contact Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP About Securities Fraud Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP reminds investors of the upcoming July 28, 2025 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired UroGen Pharma Ltd. ('UroGen' or the 'Company') (NASDAQ: URGN) securities between , inclusive (the 'Class Period'). IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR UROGEN INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS. What Happened? On May 16, 2025, before the market opened, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ('FDA') published a briefing document in advance of its Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee meeting regarding UroGen's new drug application ('NDA') for UGN-102, which stated the agency doubted whether the submitted data was sufficient to conclude that UGN-102 was effective. In the briefing document, the FDA stated: '[g]iven that [the ENVISION trial] lacked a concurrent control arm, the primary endpoints of complete response (CR) and duration of response (DOR) are difficult to interpret.' The FDA also said it had 'recommended a randomized trial design to the Applicant several times during their product's development due to concerns with interpreting efficacy results' but UroGen 'chose not to conduct a randomized trial with a design and endpoints that the FDA considered appropriate.' On this news, UroGen's stock price fell $2.54, or 25.8%, to close at $7.31 per share on May 16, 2025, on unusually heavy trading volume. Then, on May 21, 2025, before the market opened, the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee voted against approving the UGN-102 NDA. The committee found that the overall benefit-risk of the investigational therapy UGN-102 (intravesical mitomycin) is not favorable in patients with recurrent low-grade, intermediate-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. On this news, UroGen's stock price fell $3.37, or 44.7%, to close at $4.17 per share on May 21, 2025, on unusually heavy trading volume. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) the ENVISION clinical study was not designed to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of UGN-102 because it lacked a concurrent control arm; (2) as a result, the Company would have difficulty demonstrating that the duration of response endpoint was attributable to UGN-102; (3) UroGen failed to heed the FDA's warnings about the study design used to support a drug application for UGN-102; (4) as a result of the foregoing, there was a substantial risk that the NDA for UGN-102 would not be approved; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. If you purchased or otherwise acquired UroGen securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 28, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq., Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150, Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Business Wire
28-05-2025
- Business
- Business Wire
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a Leading Securities Fraud Law Firm Encourages DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. (DV) Investors To Inquire About Securities Fraud Class Action
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a leading national shareholder rights law firm, announces that a securities fraud class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. ('DoubleVerify' or the 'Company') (NYSE: DV) common stock between , inclusive (the 'Class Period'). DoubleVerify investors have until July 21, 2025 to file a lead plaintiff motion. IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR DOUBLEVERIFY HOLDINGS, INC. (DV) INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS What Happened? On May 7, 2024, DoubleVerify released its first quarter 2024 financial results and reduced its 2024 revenue guidance, disclosing that there had been a pullback in customer spending on advertising. On this news, DoubleVerify's stock price fell $11.79, or 38.6%, to close at $18.78 per share on May 8, 2024, thereby injuring investors. Then, on February 27, 2025, DoubleVerify reported lower-than-expected fourth quarter 2024 sales and earnings due in part to reduced customer spending. The Company also disclosed that the shift of ad dollars from open exchanges to closed platforms was having a negative impact on the Company. On this news, DoubleVerify's stock price fell $7.83, or 36%, to close at $13.90 per share on February 28, 2025. Then, on March 28, 2025, Adalytics Research, LLC published a report alleging, among other things, that DoubleVerify's web advertisement verification and fraud protection services were ineffective and that its customers were regularly billed for ad impressions served to bots. The same day, The Wall Street Journal reported that DoubleVerify regularly missed detection of nonhuman traffic despite the Company's claims that it helps brands avoid serving ads to nonhuman bot accounts. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) DoubleVerify's customers were shifting their ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the Company's technological capabilities were limited and competed directly with native tools provided by platforms like Meta Platforms and Amazon; (2) DoubleVerify's ability to monetize on its Activation Services was limited because the development of its technology for closed platforms was significantly more expensive and time-consuming than disclosed to investors; (3) DoubleVerify's Activation Services in connection with certain closed platforms would take several years to monetize; (4) DoubleVerify's competitors were better positioned to incorporate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, which impaired DoubleVerify's ability to compete effectively and adversely impacted the Company's profits; (5) DoubleVerify systematically overbilled its customers for ad impressions served to declared bots operating out of known data center server farms; (6) DoubleVerify's risk disclosures were materially false and misleading because they characterized adverse facts that had already materialized as mere possibilities; and (7) as a result, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired DoubleVerify common stock during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 21, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq., Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150, Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
