logo
URGN INVESTOR DEADLINE: UroGen Pharma Ltd. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit

URGN INVESTOR DEADLINE: UroGen Pharma Ltd. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit

SAN DIEGO, June 6, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers or acquirers of UroGen Pharma Ltd. (NASDAQ: URGN) securities between July 27, 2023 and May 15, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'), have until July 28, 2025 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the UroGen class action lawsuit. Captioned Cockrell v. UroGen Pharma Ltd., 25-cv-06088 (D.N.J.), the UroGen class action lawsuit charges UroGen as well as certain of UroGen's top current and former executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the UroGen class action lawsuit, please provide your information here:
https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-urogen-pharma-ltd-class-action-lawsuit-urgn.html
You can also contact attorneys J.C. Sanchez or Jennifer N. Caringal of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at info@rgrdlaw.com.
CASE ALLEGATIONS: UroGen engages in the development and commercialization of solutions for specialty cancers. According to the complaint, UroGen's lead pipeline product is UGN-102 (mitomycin), an intravesical solution intended to treat low-grade intermediate risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.
The UroGen class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) UroGen's ENVISION clinical study for UGN-102 was not designed to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of UGN-102 because it lacked a concurrent control arm; (ii) as a result, UroGen would have difficulty demonstrating that the duration of response endpoint was attributable to UGN-102; (iii) UroGen failed to heed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's ('FDA') warnings about the study design used to support a new drug application ('NDA') for UGN-102; and (iv) as a result, there was a substantial risk that the NDA for UGN-102 would not be approved.
The UroGen class action lawsuit further alleges that on May 16, 2025, the FDA published a briefing document in advance of its Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee meeting regarding UroGen's NDA for UGN-102, which stated that '[g]iven that ENVISION lacked a concurrent control arm, the primary endpoints of complete response (CR) and duration of response (DOR) are difficult to interpret,' and that the FDA 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, the price of UroGen stock fell nearly 26%, according to the complaint.
Then, on May 21, 2025, the UroGen class action lawsuit further alleges that the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee voted against approving the UGN-102 NDA, finding that the overall benefit-risk of the investigation therapy UGN-102 is not favorable in patients with recurrent low-grade, intermediate-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. On this news, the price of UroGen stock fell nearly 45%, according to the complaint.
THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired UroGen securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the UroGen class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the UroGen class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the UroGen class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the UroGen class action lawsuit.
ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world's leading law firms representing investors in securities fraud and shareholder litigation. Our Firm has been ranked #1 in the ISS Securities Class Action Services rankings for four out of the last five years for securing the most monetary relief for investors. In 2024, we recovered over $2.5 billion for investors in securities-related class action cases – more than the next five law firms combined, according to ISS. With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs' firms in the world, and the Firm's attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Please visit the following page for more information:
https://www.rgrdlaw.com/services-litigation-securities-fraud.html
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Services may be performed by attorneys in any of our offices.
Contact:
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP J.C. Sanchez, Jennifer N. Caringal 655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101 800-449-4900 info@rgrdlaw.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

TEM INVESTOR ALERT: Tempus AI, Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit
TEM INVESTOR ALERT: Tempus AI, Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit

Malaysian Reserve

timea day ago

  • Malaysian Reserve

TEM INVESTOR ALERT: Tempus AI, Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit

SAN DIEGO, July 4, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers of Tempus AI, Inc. (NASDAQ: TEM) common stock between August 6, 2024 and May 27, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'), have until Tuesday, August 12, 2025 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Tempus AI class action lawsuit. Captioned Shouse v. Tempus AI, Inc., No. 25-cv-06534 (N.D. Ill.), the Tempus AI class action lawsuit charges Tempus AI and certain of Tempus AI's top executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Tempus AI class action lawsuit, please provide your information here: You can also contact attorneys J.C. Sanchez or Jennifer N. Caringal of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at info@ CASE ALLEGATIONS: Tempus AI is a technology company advancing precision medicine through the practical application of artificial intelligence, including generative AI. The Tempus AI class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Tempus AI inflated the value of contract agreements, many of which were with related parties, included non-binding opt-ins and/or were self-funded; (ii) the credibility and substance of Tempus AI's joint venture with SoftBank Group Corporation was at risk because it gave the appearance of 'round-tripping' capital to create revenue for Tempus AI; (iii) Tempus AI-acquired Ambry Genetics Corporation had a business model based on aggressive and potentially unethical billing practices that risked scrutiny and unsustainability; (iv) AstraZeneca PLC had reduced its financial commitments to Tempus AI through a questionable 'pass-through payment' via a joint agreement between it, Tempus AI, and Pathos AI, Inc.; and (v) the above issues revealed weakness in core operations and revenue prospects. The Tempus AI class action lawsuit further alleges that on May 28, 2025, Spruce Point Capital Management, LLC issued research report on Tempus AI that raised numerous red flags over Tempus AI's management, operations, and financial reporting. On this news, the price of Tempus AI stock fell more than 19%, according to the complaint. THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased Tempus AI common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Tempus AI class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the Tempus AI class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Tempus AI class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Tempus AI class action lawsuit. ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world's leading law firms representing investors in securities fraud and shareholder litigation. Our Firm has been ranked #1 in the ISS Securities Class Action Services rankings for four out of the last five years for securing the most monetary relief for investors. In 2024, we recovered over $2.5 billion for investors in securities-related class action cases – more than the next five law firms combined, according to ISS. With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs' firms in the world, and the Firm's attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Please visit the following page for more information: Past results do not guarantee future may be performed by attorneys in any of our offices. Contact: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLPJ.C. Sanchez, Jennifer N. Caringal655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101800-449-4900info@

AAPL INVESTOR NOTICE: Apple Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit
AAPL INVESTOR NOTICE: Apple Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit

Malaysian Reserve

time3 days ago

  • Malaysian Reserve

AAPL INVESTOR NOTICE: Apple Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit

SAN DIEGO, July 2, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers or acquirers of Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) securities between June 10, 2024 and June 9, 2025, all dates inclusive (the 'Class Period'), have until August 19, 2025 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Apple class action lawsuit. Captioned Tucker v. Apple Inc., No. 25-cv-05197 (N.D. Cal.), the Apple class action lawsuit charges Apple as well as certain of Apple's top current and former executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Apple class action lawsuit, please provide your information here: You can also contact attorneys J.C. Sanchez or Jennifer N. Caringal of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at info@ CASE ALLEGATIONS: The Apple class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Apple misstated the time it would take to integrate the advanced artificial intelligence ('AI')-based Siri features into its devices; (ii) accordingly, it was highly unlikely that these features would be available for the iPhone 16; (iii) the lack of such advanced AI-based features would hurt iPhone 16 sales; and (iv) as a result, Apple's business and/or financial prospects were overstated. The Apple class action lawsuit further alleges that on March 7, 2025, Apple announced it was indefinitely delaying promised updates to its Siri digital assistant. The Apple class action lawsuit alleges that on this news, the price of Apple stock fell. Then, on March 12, 2025, the Apple class action lawsuit further alleges that Morgan Stanley published a report in which analyst Erik Woodring lowered his price target on Apple from $275 to $252, asserting that the delay in introducing advanced Siri features would impact iPhone upgrade cycles throughout 2025 and 2026, and presenting evidence that roughly 50% of iPhone owners who did not upgrade to the iPhone 16 attributed their decision to such delays. On this news, the price of Apple stock fell further, according to the complaint. Thereafter, the Apple class action lawsuit alleges that on April 3, 2025, the Wall Street Journal published an article titled 'Apple and Amazon Promised Us Revolutionary AI. We're Still Waiting,' which stated, in relevant part, that '[w]ith 'more personal' Siri . . . , the tech giant[] marketed features [it] ha[s] yet to deliver,' and suggested that while 'this is challenging technology and the cost of getting it wrong is devastatingly high, especially for [a] compan[y] like Apple . . . that must build trust with customers,' 'the same responsibility applies to marketing: They shouldn't announce products until they're sure they can deliver them.' On this news, the price of Apple stock fell more than 7%, according to the complaint. Finally, on June 9, 2025, Apple hosted its Worldwide Developer Conference ('WWDC'), almost one year to the day after first announcing the suite of supposedly forthcoming Apple Intelligence features at the 2024 WWDC, and Apple failed to announce any new updates regarding advanced Siri features, according to the complaint. On this news, the price of Apple stock fell further, according to the complaint. Last year, Robbins Geller secured a $490 million recovery in a securities fraud class action case alleging Apple CEO Timothy Cook made false and misleading statements to investors – the third-largest securities class action recovery ever in the Northern District of California and the fifth-largest such recovery ever in the Ninth Circuit. In the order granting final approval of the settlement, the court recognized the 'skill and strategic vision, as well as the risk taken by [Robbins Geller]' in securing the sizeable recovery while efficiently managing the 'uniquely complex' aspects of the case against 'highly sophisticated and experienced counsel and defendants.' Learn more by clicking here. THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Apple securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Apple class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the Apple class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Apple class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Apple class action lawsuit. ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world's leading law firms representing investors in securities fraud and shareholder litigation. Our Firm has been ranked #1 in the ISS Securities Class Action Services rankings for four out of the last five years for securing the most monetary relief for investors. In 2024, we recovered over $2.5 billion for investors in securities-related class action cases – more than the next five law firms combined, according to ISS. With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs' firms in the world, and the Firm's attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Please visit the following page for more information: Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Services may be performed by attorneys in any of our offices. Contact: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP J.C. Sanchez, Jennifer N. Caringal 655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101 800-449-4900 info@

SCO digital economy forum to be held in China, highlighting cooperation
SCO digital economy forum to be held in China, highlighting cooperation

The Star

time5 days ago

  • The Star

SCO digital economy forum to be held in China, highlighting cooperation

TIANJIN, June 30 (Xinhua) -- The 2025 Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Digital Economy Forum will be held in north China's Tianjin Municipality from July 10 to 11, its organizers announced on Monday. Themed "New Bonds in the Digital Economy, New Horizons for Cooperation," the forum aims to expand new development space for the SCO and ensure digital dividends benefit people across the region. Over 600 participants from China and abroad will discuss data circulation and trade, industrial digitalization, digital infrastructure, AI applications, smart cities, and digital talent development -- key areas of common interest to SCO members. The event is co-organized by the National Data Administration (NDA) and the Tianjin municipal government. Speaking at a press conference, Yu Ying, deputy director of the NDA, said that China places great importance on international cooperation on the digital economy. Since the establishment of the NDA in October 2023, China has signed memorandums of understanding on digital economy cooperation with 26 countries, including Russia, Brazil, Hungary, Nigeria and Malaysia. China has achieved positive progress in developing the digital economy in recent years, with the added value of its core digital economy industries accounting for about 10 percent of its GDP by the end of 2024, Yu said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store