Articles Posted in Class Action

| by

Bristow GroupPublicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Bristow Group (NYSE:BRS) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by BRS. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Bristow Group between February 8, 2018 and February 12, 2019.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, BRS provided false and/or misleading material information and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public, chiefly: that the company did not have effective monitoring procedures in connection to the non-financial covenant in its agreements for secured financing and leasing; that the company was unable to give adequate assurances that it would comply with select non-financial covenants; that it was likely the company would violate certain of its agreements; that the company had previously made understatements in connection to its short-term debt figures; that when the company corrected these figures, there would be a material effect on its financial statements; that its internal controls governing financial reporting had a material weakness; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period about its business, operations and prospects were materially misleading and/or had no reasonable basis. The complaint alleges that when true facts emerged, investors suffered losses. Specifically, the complaint notes that the company announced on February 11, 2019 that it “did not have adequate monitoring control processes in place related to non-financial covenants within certain of its secured financing and lease agreements,” and that it had canceled an agreement to buy Columbia Helicopters. Following these announcements, BRS declined in value by almost 40%, or $1.22/share, closing at $1.84/share on the following day, February 12, 2019.

According to the company’s website, Bristow Group is “the leading provider of industrial aviation services offering helicopter transportation, search and rescue (SAR) and aircraft support services to government and civil organizations worldwide.” It is headquartered in Houston, Texas, and has operations in the Gulf of Mexico, the North Sea, Nigeria, and “other major offshore oil and gas producing regions,” such as Brazil, Canada, Russia and Australia. The company describes its goal as “to provide the safest and most reliable services to clients around the world.” Its affiliates include Airnorth, Eastern Airways, Cougar Helicopters, and Sky Futures. The company trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol BRS.

Continue Reading

| by

Avon Products Publicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Avon Products (NASDAQ:AVP) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by AVP. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Avon Products between August 2, 2016 and August 2, 2017.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, AVP provided false and/or misleading material information and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public, chiefly: that the company participated in a scheme, which it did not disclose, and in which it loosened the terms of its credit such that it could bring new representatives aboard in Brazil, the company’s biggest market; that the company did not disclose that it had changed its credit terms in that country; that the company failed to raise its allowance for doubtful accounts so as to adjust for the changes it made to its credit terms in that country; and that as a result of the foregoing the company’s stock price was artificially inflated. According to the complaint, when the company disclosed in a Form 10-Q filing on November 3, 2016 that increased bad debt expenses had adversely affected its operating expenses and margins, the company’s stock price fell by more than 7% over the following two trading days. Later, during a conference call on February 16, 2017 to discuss its Q4 2016 results, the company disclosed a net loss of $0.03/share and a decline in its active representatives of 2%, as well as $35 million in bad debt which it attributed to the credit term changes which it had not previously disclosed; following these announcements, the company’s stock declined $1.09/share over the following day, or almost 19%, and continued to fall more than 3% on February 18, 2017.

During a conference call discussing its Q1 2017 results on February 18, 2017, according to the complaint, the company disclosed a net loss of $0.10/share, as well as a decline in active representatives of 3%. It also announced that even though it had provided assurance previously that it had resolved the bad debt issue in Brazil, it had nonetheless recorded a substantial bad debt charge connected to the loosening of its terms. This news was followed by a decline of about 2% in its stock. In August 2017, according to the complaint, the company reported that its actions taken in Brazil to remedy its previous actions had resulted in adverse effects on its representatives and revenue in that country, resulting in a decline of about 11% in the company’s stock. The complaint alleges that when true facts about the company’s business, operations and prospects emerged, investors suffered losses.

Continue Reading

| by

Uxin LimitedPublicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Uxin Limited (NASDAQ:UXIN) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by UXIN. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Uxin Limited between June 24, 2018, and February 12, 2019.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, and specifically with reference to the company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued for its initial public offering, UXIN provided false and/or misleading material information and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public, chiefly: that it was probable the company would cease its provision of complementary services, such as inspections, to customers; that the company would instead direct customers to other dealers who offer those services; that this would have a material impact on the company’s 2B business; and that consequently the company’s statements in its Registration Statement, particularly with regard to its business, operations and prospects, were materially false and misleading. The complaint alleges that when true facts emerged, investors suffered losses.

According to the company’s website, Uxin Limited is a China-based e-commerce platform for used cars, which describes itself as the largest such platform based on the “number of transactions and gross merchandise volume.” According to its description, the company’s mission is to empower people to purchase the car they want, wherever their location in the country. Its “innovative, integrated online and offline platform” helps customers and dealers purchase and sell used cars at “each step of the transaction and covers the entire value chain,” including inspection, warranty, and insurance. The company trades on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol UXIN.

Continue Reading

| by

Maiden Holdings

Publicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Maiden Holdings (NASDAQ:MHLD) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by MHLD. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Maiden Holdings between March 4, 2014, and November 9, 2018.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, MHLD provided false and/or misleading material information and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public, chiefly: that the company did not have sufficient underwriting protocols and risk management controls to conduct accurate pricing of its reinsurance policies, establish appropriate loss reserves and steer clear of high losses; that the company did not take proper steps to adequately evaluate and cross-reference its biggest client, Amtrust’s insurance portfolio, so as to confirm that it had adequately priced the entity’s portfolio and avoid exposing the company to any risk of high losses; that the company did not perform adequate independent reviews, analyses and audits of the Amtrust reinsurance unit’s underlying policies, which the complaint says would have demonstrated that these policies’ risk of loss had been understated by a substantial degree; and that consequently the company was at a substantially heightened risk of loss, diminished prospects and reserve charges; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period were false and misleading and/or had no reasonable basis. The complaint alleges that when true facts emerged, investors suffered losses.

According to the company’s website, Maiden Holdings is a holding company based in Bermuda and established in 2007 which describes itself as “focused on serving the needs of regional and specialty insurers in Europe and select other global markets.” According to the company’s description, it serves these customers by offering “innovative reinsurance solutions” which are designed to support those companies’ capital needs. It trades on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol MHLD.

Continue Reading

| by

Revolution Lighting Technologies Publicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Revolution Lighting Technologies (NASDAQ:RVLT) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by RVLT. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Revolution Lighting Technologies from March 14, 2014, and November 14.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, RVLT provided false and/or misleading material information and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public in connection with its initial public offering, chiefly: that the company was not properly recognizing revenue in connection to certain of its transactions; and that consequently the company’s financial statements contained inaccurate information; that the company did not have proper internal controls governing its financial reporting practices; that this stood to expose the company to scrutiny from regulatory authorities which could lead to significant expenses; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period were misleading. The complaint notes that the company disclosed on October 17, 2018 that its Q3 2018 revenue would be less than its previous guidance had indicated, and that its CEO, Robert LaPenta, was willing to acquire all RVLT common stock for $2.00/share. Following this announcement, RVLT declined in value more than 38%, or $0.98/share, closing at $1.58/share on that day and causing investors to suffer losses. Two days later, on October 19, 2018, Revolution Lightning announced the existence of an SEC probe into its revenue recognition for transactions that took place from 2014 through Q2 2018, after which RVLT declined in value by more than 10%, or $0.16/share, closing at $1.43/share on October 22, 2018, causing additional harm to investors. When the company disclosed, on November 14th, 2018, that its CEO had offered to acquire all remaining outstanding RVLT common stock at a price of $1.50/share, partially in connection with the SEC probe, RVLT declined in value by almost 40%, or $0.55/share, closing at $0.85/share on November 15, 2018.

According to the company’s website, Revolution Lighting Technologies “is a leader in the design, manufacture, marketing, and sale of LED lighting solutions focusing on the industrial, commercial and government markets in the United States, Canada, and internationally.” The company offers a “comprehensive advanced product platform” using what it describes as “advanced” technologies, and is involved in the design, engineering and manufacturing of interior and exterior lighting products. It trades on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol RVLT.

Continue Reading

| by

Lexicon Pharmaceuticals Publicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Lexicon Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ:LXRX) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by LXRX. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Lexicon Pharmaceuticals from March 11, 2016 until January 17, 2019.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, LXRX provided false and/or misleading material information and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public in connection with its initial public offering, chiefly: that in connection with the company’s Phase III clinical trials for the product Sotagliflozin, which it was developing in collaboration with the pharmaceutical company Sanofi, data generated regarding the product’s safety and efficacy were less positive than the company had indicated; that in fact the product posed risks to consumer health substantial enough to jeopardize its chances of receiving approval by the FDA; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period were false and misleading. When the company disclosed on January 17, 2019 that an FDA advisory committee “voted eight to eight on the question of whether the overall benefits of [Lexicon’s product] Zynquista (sotagliflozin) outweighed the risks to support approval,” its stock price declined in value by 22.6%, or $1.74/share, and closed at $5.96/share on the following day.

According to the company’s website, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals is “a fully integrated biopharmaceutical company that is applying a unique approach to gene science based on Nobel Prize-winning technology to discover and develop precise medicines for people with serious, chronic conditions.” It operated a program called the Genome5000 Program, according to its description, in which the company’s scientists studied “nearly 5,000 genes” to identify targets for drug development. Its describes its passion as “to bring medicines to the market that have the potential to improve the standard of care for diseases that have not experienced new treatment innovation in years,” rather than focusing on any single disease or class of patient. The company trades on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol LXRX.

Continue Reading

| by

Tyme TechnologiesPublicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Tyme Technologies (NASDAQ:TYME) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by TYME. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Tyme Technologies between March 14, 2018 and January 18, 2019.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, TYME provided false and/or misleading material information and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public in connection with its initial public offering, chiefly: that the company’s Phase II study regarding its SM-88 product candidate had been improperly designed in such a manner that it would not yield dependable results concerning that treatment’s efficacy in treating pancreatic cancer; that the company had failed in that trial to involve an appropriate control group; that this failure had adverse effects on the reliability of the data yielded by that study; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period were false and misleading. The complaint alleges that when the company reported that study’s results on January 18, 2019, and noted that the trial did not involve a control group and instead compared the results to historical controls, the study’s failure to include a control group was pointed out by analysts and the company’s stock price declined 35.39% or $1.32/share, closing at $2.41/share on that day. The complaint alleges that when true facts emerged, investors suffered losses.

According to the company’s website, Tyme Technologies “a clinical-stage biotechnology company developing cancer therapeutics that are intended to be broadly effective across a range of tumor types, while maintaining patient’s quality of life with relatively low toxicity profiles.” According to its description, its approach differs from other companies whose products seek to “regulate specific pathways within cancer,” instead attempting to exploit “a cancer cell’s innate metabolic requirements to compromise its defenses.” The company collaborates with medical research bodies like Mount Sinai and the mayo Clinic, it notes, and its chief clinical program at the moment is SM-88, “an oral amino acid-based therapy” which is in Phase II development for the treatment of prostrate and pancreatic cancers, according to the description. The company trades on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol TYME.

Continue Reading

| by

Liberty Health SciencesPublicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Liberty Health Sciences (OTC:LHSIF) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by LHSIF. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Liberty Health Sciences between June 28, 2018 and December 3, 2018.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, LHSIF provided false and/or misleading material information, and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public, chiefly:that the company was participating in a scheme with Aphria Inc. that involvement the execution of fraudulent transactions and acquisitions for the purpose of benefiting certain individuals within the companies’ to the detriment of their investors; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period were false and misleading and/or had no reasonable basis. The complaint alleges that when true details emerged in the form of a December 3, 2018 report stating that Aphria was participating in the acquisition of certain shell companies at prices that were artificially inflated, and a December 6, 2018 report connecting LHSIF to those activities, investors suffered losses.

According to the company’s website, Liberty Health Sciences “provides investors with access to the growing United States cannabis market.” It notes that the cannabis market is the “fastest growing industry in the United States” and that medical cannabis sales are projected to grow from $4.7 billion in 2016 to $13.3 billion in 2020, with adult recreation sales expected to rise from $2.6 billion to $11.2 billion. The company’s products include Balanced Capsules, Balance Oral Spray, vaporizer units and cartridges, and CBD oils. It trades over the counter under the symbol LHSIF.

Continue Reading

| by

Yangtze River Port and LogisticsPublicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in Yangtze River Port and Logistics (NASDAQ:YRCW) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by YRIV. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in Yangtze River Port and Logistics between February 2, 2016 and December 5, 2018.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, YRIV provided false and/or misleading material information, and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public, chiefly: that the company’s primary asset, a lease of the Wuhan Yangtze River Newport Logistics Center, was fabricated; that the company’s lone subsidiary in operation, Wuhan Yangtze River Newport Logistics Company, had been deemed insolvent in China as a result of default judgments rendered against it; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period about its business, operations and prospects were false and misleading and/or had no reasonable basis. The complaint alleges that when true facts emerged in a December 6, 2018 report by Hindenburg Research stating that “evidence shows that YRIV’s claim to its main asset is likely fabricated,” investors suffered losses.

According to the company’s website, Yangtze River Port and Logistics is “a Nevada corporation that operates through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Wuhan Yangtze River Newport Logistics Co., Ltd., a non-state-owned logistics and port management company focused on helping its clients from all over the world, enter Wuhan Yangluo Comprehensive Bonded Area and Pilot Free Trade Area.” It provides that service, according to the description, by offering “a range of services” that include office space, logistics, waterways, railways, road transportation, storage, processing, and logistics finance. The company trades on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol YRIV.

Continue Reading

| by

YRC Worldwide

Publicly available records indicate that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors in YRC Worldwide (NASDAQ:YRCW) in connection to alleged violations of securities laws by YRCW. Fitapelli Kurta is interested in hearing from investors who have complaints regarding investments made in YRC Worldwide between March 10, 2014 and December 14, 2018.

The class action complaint specifically alleges that during the period in question, YRCW provided false and/or misleading material information, and/or failed to disclose adverse material information to the public, chiefly: that the company made systematic overcharges of the US federal government for certain freight carrier services starting in 2005 and extending until at least 2013; that as a result of these alleged overcharges, the federal government (and specifically the Department of Defense) made overpayments of millions of dollars for lighter shipments than the government was charged for; that such conduct, if true and discovered, would subject the company to heightened scrutiny from federal and regulatory authorities, and potentially subject it to significant liabilities; and that consequently the company’s statements to the public during the relevant period were false and misleading. The complaint alleges that when true facts emerged, investors suffered losses.

According to the company’s website, YRC Worldwide is “the holding company for a portfolio of successful brands including YRC Freight, YRC Reimer, New Penn, Holland and Reddaway.” Per that description, YRC’s companies operate the “largest, most comprehensive network in America,” boasting capabilities at the local, regional, national and international levels. Its logistics units “offer industry-leading expertise in heavyweight shipments and flexible supply chain solutions.” The company is headquartered in Overland Park, Kansas and trades on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol YRCW.

Continue Reading