Latest news with #NexteraEnergy
Globe and Mail
6 days ago
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP Files Securities Class Action Against XPLR Infrastructure, LP f/k/a Nextera Energy Partners, LP (NYSE: XIFR)
Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP ('Scott+Scott'), an international shareholder and consumer rights litigation firm, has filed a securities class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California against XPLR Infrastructure, LP f/k/a Nextera Energy Partners, LP ('XPLR' or the 'Company') (NYSE: XIFR), and certain of its former and current officers and/or directors (collectively, 'Defendants'). The Class Action asserts claims under §§10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §§78j(b) and 78t(a)) and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder (17 C.F.R. §240.10b‑5) on behalf of all persons other than Defendants who purchased or otherwise acquired XPLR common units between September 27, 2023 and January 27, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'), and were damaged thereby (the 'Class'). The Class Action filed by Scott+Scott is captioned: James Alvrus v. XPLR Infrastructure, LP f/k/a Nextera Energy Partners, LP, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-01755. LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE ON SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 XPLR acquires, owns, and manages contracted clean energy projects in the United States, including a portfolio of contracted wind and solar power projects, as well as a natural gas pipeline. The Class Action alleges that, during the Class Period, Defendants made misleading statements and omissions regarding the Company's business, financial condition, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to warn investors that: (i) XPLR was struggling to maintain its operations as a yieldco (i.e., a business that owns and operates fully-built and operational power generating projects, focused on delivering large cash distributions to investors); (ii) Defendants temporarily relieved this issue by entering into certain financing arrangements while downplaying the attendant risks; (iii) XPLR could not resolve those financings before their maturity date without risking significant unitholder dilution; (iv) as a result, Defendants planned to halt cash distributions to investors and instead redirect those funds to, inter alia, resolve those financings; (v) as a result of all the foregoing, XPLR's yieldco business model and distribution growth rate was unsustainable; and (vi) as a result, Defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. The market began to learn the truth on January 28, 2025, when XPLR shocked investors by announcing that it would suspend entirely cash distributions to common unitholders and essentially abandon its yieldco model. Specifically, XPLR issued a press release announcing a 'strategic respositioning' and stating that it was 'moving from a business model that focused almost entirely on raising new capital to acquire assets while distributing substantially all of its excess cash flows to unitholders to a model in which XPLR Infrastructure utilizes retained operating cash flows to fund attractive investments.' In addition, XPLR announced that it had appointed a new CEO and CFO. On this news, the price of XPLR's common units fell from a closing price of $15.80 per unit on January 27, 2025 to a closing price of $10.49 per unit on January 29, 2025—a decline of $5.31 per unit, or nearly 35%, trading on unusually high volume. LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE ON SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 If you purchased or acquired XPLR common units during the Class Period and were damaged thereby, you are a member of the 'Class' and may be able to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. If you wish to apply to be lead plaintiff, a motion on your behalf must be filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California no later than September 8, 2025. The lead plaintiff is a court-appointed representative for absent class members of the Class. You do not need to seek appointment as lead plaintiff to share in any Class recovery in the Class Action. If you are a Class member and there is a recovery for the Class, you can share in that recovery as an absent Class member. If you wish to apply to be lead plaintiff, please contact attorney Nicholas Bruno at (888) 398-9312 or at nbruno@ What Can You Do? You may contact an attorney to discuss your rights regarding the appointment of lead plaintiff or your interest in the Class Action. You may retain counsel of your choice to represent you in the Class Action. About Scott+Scott Scott+Scott is an international law firm known for its expertise in representing corporate clients, institutional investors, businesses, and individuals harmed by anticompetitive conduct or other forms of wrongdoing, including securities law and shareholder violations. With more than 100 attorneys in eight offices in the United States, as well as three offices in Europe, our advocacy has resulted in significant monetary settlements on behalf of our clients, along with other forms of relief. Our highly experienced attorneys have been recognized for being among the top financial lawyers in 2024 by Lawdragon, WWL: Commercial Litigation 2024, and Legal 500 in Antitrust Civil Litigation, and have received top Chambers 2024 rankings. In addition, we have been repeatedly recognized by the American Antitrust Institute for the successful litigation of high-stakes anticompetitive claims in the United States. To learn more about Scott+Scott, our attorneys, or complex case resolution, please visit
Yahoo
05-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Petition against wind turbines in east El Paso County
(CALHAN, Colo.) — Colleen Nicholson is tired of windmills in eastern El Paso County but doesn't want to leave her home in Calhan. 'People are saying you should just move and I'm like, 'this is my retirement home,'' Nicholson said. Nicholson found that retirement home four years ago. For her, it was the open fields that surrounded the home, along with the peace that made it feel like the place to settle down. Little did she know that there were wind turbines in place near the house that she said contaminated her water before she got the keys. Nicholson sent FOX21 News a 2020 water toxin report for her home's water well. Within the water, copper, sodium, and sulfate were present, among other chemicals. That's why when Nextera Energy announced its Blue Grama Projects, Nicholson stepped up and made a petition to ban wind turbines in eastern El Paso County. 'They're not effective and they use oil, 80 gallons of oil per turbine,' Nicholson said. 'When the turbines break down, they leak the oil into the ground.' Nicholson also cites the impacts from infrasound, which is a noise so low you can't hear it. As for known impacts, our own meteorologist Megan Montero sayins there are several studies looking into theories of impacts from wind turbines. 'Some are reporting there are negative health effects such as stress, disturbed sleep, headaches potentially, and also just a reduced quality of life,' Montero said. Nicholson's petition reached 70 signatures Friday evening, but she adds she wants to collect more before bringing the petition forward to the El Paso County Commissioners. FOX21 News reached out to commissioners for comment on this latest petition and received a response saying, 'Because this matter is expected to come before the Board, we are legally required to maintain neutrality and are prohibited from making public comments to safeguard the rights of all stakeholders.' We also reached out to local lawmakers Jeff Crank and Lauren Boebert for comment, but they were not able to make a statement by our deadline. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
