Class Period: May 7, 2021 – February 25, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: June 14, 2022
Aurinia is a biopharmaceutical company that develops and commercializes therapies to treat various diseases with unmet medical needs in Japan and the People’s Republic of China (“China”). The company’s only product is LUPKYNIS, which it offers for the treatment of adult patients with active lupus nephritis.
Throughout the Class Period, the defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations and compliance policies. In particular, the defendants have made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Aurinia experienced declining revenues; (ii) Aurinia’s sales prospects for LUPKYNIS in 2022 would fall far short of expectations; (iii) accordingly, the Company had significantly overstated LUPKYNIS’ business prospects; (iv) as a result, the company had overstated its financial position and/or prospects for 2022; and (v) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On February 28, 2022, Aurinia issued a press release announcing financial results for the quarter and full year ended December 31, 2021. Aurinia reported a year-over-year sales decline and a lower-than-expected sales outlook for 2022, among other things.
As a result of this news, the price of Aurinia common stock fell $3.94 per share, or 24.26%, to close at $12.30 per share on February 28, 2022.
As a result of the defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions and the precipitous decline in the market value of the company’s securities, the plaintiff and other members of the group have suffered significant losses and damages.
For more information on the Aurinia class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/AUPH
Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. (NASDAQ:SDIG)
Class Period: October 22, 2021 IPO
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: June 13, 2022
In October 2021, the Company completed its IPO, selling 7,690,400 Class A common shares at $19.00 per share.
On March 29, 2022, after market close, Stronghold announced its fourth quarter and full year 2021 financial results. The company reported a net loss of $0.52 for the quarter, below analyst estimates of $0.04 in earnings per share, and Stronghold’s chief executive officer cited “significant headwinds at our operations, which are accelerating significantly.” impacted recent financial performance”.
As a result of this news, the company’s share price fell as much as $3.28, or 32%, to close at $6.97 per share on March 30, 2022. On April 14, 2022, Stronghold’s stock was trading at just $4.78 per share, down more than 75% from its IPO price of $19 per share.
The complaint filed in this class-action lawsuit alleges that the registration statement was materially false and misleading and omitted to state that: (1) contract suppliers, including MinerVa, were reasonably likely to miss anticipated delivery quantities and deadlines; (2) that Stronghold would have difficulty finding miners outside of confirmed orders due to the strong demand and pre-sold supply of mining equipment in the industry; (3) that as a result of the foregoing, there was a significant risk that Stronghold would not be able to expand its mining capacity as anticipated; (4) that Stronghold would be likely to suffer significant losses as a result; and (5) as a result, the statements made by the defendants regarding their businesses, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
For more information on the Stronghold class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/SDIG
Lilium N.V. (NASDAQ:LILM)
Class Period: March 30, 2021 – March 14, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: June 17, 2022
On March 14, 2022, Iceberg Research published a briefing report entitled “Lilium NV – The Losing Horse in the eVTOL [electric vertical take-off and landing aircraft] Race” (the “Iceberg Report”). The Iceberg Report claimed, among other things, that “[m]All experts have expressed serious doubts about the viability of the company’s Lilium jet to achieve its goal of flying[ing] up to 155 km[,]”citing “its configuration of 36 ducted fans (recently reduced to 30) that expend energy on takeoff and landing (hovering) leaving little energy for actual flight.” The Iceberg Report also noted that “Lilium promises its jet will have easy access to battery cells with an energy density of 320-330 Wh/kg[,]” “[o]One of the sources it relies on to show that these batteries are within reach is . . . a 34.8% Lilium-owned affiliate whose CEO Sujeet Kumar was accused by General Motors of misrepresenting battery performance while at his former company Envia Systems.” The Iceberg Report further noted that Lilium’s chief executive officer “did not have significant professional experience in aerospace prior to joining Lilium in 2015” and “estimate[d] Lilium has about 18 months before its cash runs dry.”
As a result of this news, Lilium’s share price fell $1.25 per share, or 33.88%, to close at $2.44 per share on March 14, 2022.
According to the Complaint, throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose the following: (1) Lilium grossly overstates the design and capabilities of the Lilium Jet; (2) Lilium significantly overstates the likelihood of Lilium Jet’s timely certification; (3) Lilium misrepresents its ability to source or manufacture the necessary batteries for the Lilium Jet; (4) the SPAC merger would not and did not generate enough money to commercialize the Lilium Jet; (5) Qell Acquisition Corp. failed to review the merger with due diligence; and (6) as a result, the defendants’ public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times. When the true details emerged, the lawsuit claimed that investors suffered harm.
For more information on the Lilium class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/LILM
Li-Cycle Holdings Corp. (NYSE:LICY)
Class Period: February 16, 2021 – March 23, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: June 20, 2022
On March 24, 2022, Blue Orca Capital released a report (the “Report”) that described the company as “a near-fatal combination of stock promotion, ridiculous corporate governance, a busted cash-bleeding business, and a highly questionable Enron-like… Accounting” is characterized. According to the report, “Li-Cycle calculates revenue using an Enron-like mark-to-model accounting trick Li-Cycle recognizes revenue months in advance of actually selling its recycled black mass, based on its own preliminary estimate of the product’s future value. This accounting is clearly open to abuse and gives Li-Cycle discretion over its reported earnings. We suspect that under this framework, Li-Cycle adds the value of its accounts receivable to unsold products and offsets the profits through its revenue line.”
According to the Complaint, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose during the Class Period: (1) Li-Cycle’s largest customer, Traxys North America LLC, is not actually a customer, just a broker who works offers financial capital for the company while Traxys tries to sell Li-Cycle’s product to end customers; (2) the company was involved in highly questionable related party transactions; (3) the company’s mark-to-model accounting is susceptible to abuse and gives a false impression of growth; (4) a significant portion of the Company’s reported revenues came from the simple appraisal of receivables from unsold products; (5) the company’s gross margin has probably been negative since its inception; (6) the company will require an additional $1 billion in funding to support its projected growth (which is a higher number than that raised by the company through the merger); and (7) as a result, the defendants’ public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times. As the true details emerged, the lawsuit alleges that investors suffered damage.
As a result of this news, Li-Cycle’s share price fell $0.47 per share, or 5.60%, to close at $7.93 per share on March 24, 2022.
For more information on Li-Cycle’s class action lawsuit, please visit: https://bespc.com/cases/LICY
About Bragar Eagle & Squire, PC:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivatives and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. More information about the company can be found at www.bespc.com . attorney advertising. Previous results do not guarantee similar results.