Latest news with #RobbinsGeller
Globe and Mail
13 hours ago
- Business
- Globe and Mail
NEOG INVESTOR ALERT: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces that Neogen Corporation Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit
The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers of Neogen Corporation (NASDAQ: NEOG) common stock between January 5, 2023 and June 3, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'), have until September 16, 2025 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Neogen class action lawsuit. Captioned Operating Engineers Construction Industry and Miscellaneous Pension Fund v. Neogen Corporation, No. 25-cv-00802 (W.D. Mich.), the Neogen class action lawsuit charges Neogen and certain of Neogen'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 Neogen 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: Neogen, together with its subsidiaries, engages in the development, manufacture, and marketing of various products and services dedicated to food and animal safety. According to the complaint, in December 2021, it was announced that Neogen would merge with the Food Safety Division of the 3M Company, with the deal closing in September 2022. The Neogen class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) defendants led investors to believe that Neogen's integration with 3M was progressing much better than it actually was; and (ii) even when Neogen was forced to reveal that certain 'inefficiencies' arose as a result of the integration, defendants downplayed them and assured investors that they were fully aware and committed to resolving them quickly. The Neogen class action lawsuit further alleges that on January 10, 2025, Neogen announced its preliminary second quarter of 2025 financial results, revealing, among other things, that: (i) GAAP net income in the quarter was significantly negative due to a $461 million non-cash goodwill impairment charge related to the 3M acquisition; (ii) Neogen cut its fiscal year 2025 revenue and EBITDA guidance; and (iii) Neogen concluded that, as of November 30, 2024, Neogen had material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting. On this news, the price of Neogen common stock fell more than 5%, according to the complaint. Then, on April 9, 2025, the Neogen class action lawsuit alleges that Neogen announced its third quarter of 2025 financial results, reporting a loss of $11 million, or $0.05 per share, compared with a loss of $2 million, or $0.01 per share, a year earlier. Neogen further announced that revenue fell 3.4% to $221 million which had been negatively impacted by integration issues, Neogen was cutting its fiscal year 2025 revenue and EBITDA outlook, capital expenditures were expected to be $100 million as a result of lowered adjusted EBITDA and a 'pull-forward of . . . integration capex into fiscal 2025,' and that CEO, defendant John Adent, would be stepping down. On this news, the price of Neogen common stock fell 28%, according to the complaint. Finally, on June 4, 2025, Neogen revealed that it expected 'EBITDA margin to probably be around the high-teens' which represented a considerable drop from the previous quarter's profit margin of 22%, blaming the expected shortfall on 'elevated . . . inventory write-offs,' according to the complaint. The Neogen class action lawsuit alleges that on this news, the price of Neogen common stock fell more than 17%. THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased Neogen common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Neogen 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 Neogen class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Neogen class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Neogen 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:
Globe and Mail
21 hours ago
- Business
- Globe and Mail
INVESTOR DEADLINE: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces that Centene Corporation (CNC) Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Investor Class Action Lawsuit
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that the Centene class action lawsuit – captioned Lunstrum v. Centene Corporation, No. 25-cv-05659, and pending in the Southern District of New York – seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of Centene Corporation (NYSE: CNC) securities and charges Centene as well as certain of Centene'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 Centene 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@ Lead plaintiff motions for the Centene class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than September 8, 2025. CASE ALLEGATIONS: Centene is a healthcare enterprise that provides fully integrated services to government-sponsored and commercial healthcare programs, focusing on underinsured and uninsured individuals. The Centene class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period created the false impression that they possessed reliable information pertaining to Centene's projected revenue outlook and anticipated growth while also touting enrollment rates and low morbidity. In truth, Centene's optimistic reports and promises regarding Centene's inflated guidance fell short of reality when a preliminary analysis of over two-thirds of Centene's marketplace share showed lower-than-anticipated enrollment and increased aggregate market morbidity, according to the complaint. The Centene class action lawsuit further alleges that, on July 1, 2025, Centene withdrew its 2025 guidance. Particularly, following an analysis of the 2025 Health Insurance Marketplace, Centene's overall market growth across 22 states, or 72% of Centene's marketplace membership, was lower than expected, according to the complaint. Centene also stated that this preliminary analysis resulted in a reduction of its previously issued guidance to approximately $1.8 billion or an adjusted diluted EPS of $2.75, the Centene class action lawsuit alleges. On this news, the price of Centene stock fell by more than 40%. THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Centene securities during the class period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Centene 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 Centene class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Centene class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Centene 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:
Associated Press
a day ago
- Business
- Associated Press
INVESTOR DEADLINE TOMORROW: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces that Organon & Co. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit
SAN DIEGO, July 21, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit seeking to represent purchasers of Organon & Co. (NYSE: OGN) publicly traded securities between November 3, 2022 and April 30, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'). Captioned Lerner v. Organon & Co., No. 25-cv-12983 (D.N.J.), the Organon class action lawsuit charges Organon as well as certain of Organon's top executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. A previously filed complaint is captioned Hauser v. Organon & Co., No. 25-cv-05322 (D.N.J.). If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Organon 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 [email protected]. Lead plaintiff motions for the Organon class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than this upcoming Tuesday, July 22, 2025. CASE ALLEGATIONS: Organon develops and delivers health solutions through prescription therapies and medical devices. The Organon class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Organon faced a higher risk of loss of exclusivity and price erosion as to Nexplanon than implied by its Class Period statements; (ii) as a result, Organon's long-term Nexplanon sales growth was not as strong as defendants' portended during the Class Period, and would not reach $1 billion by the end of fiscal year 2025 (much less upwards of $1.5 billion after that), and that Organon was likely not on track to achieve the $1 billion milestone payment from Merck & Co. on its Nexplanon sales thereafter; (iii) thus, Organon was not on track to achieve, much less maintain, the $1 billion in free cash flow required to sustain its outsized dividend; (iv) consequently, Organon was also not on track to maintain 4.0x debt leverage; (v) as such, Organon might not be able to maintain its corporate debt ratings at their then-current Class Period levels; and (vi) as a result, Organon lacked a reasonable basis to report its Class Period business metrics and financial projections. The Organon class action lawsuit further alleges that on May 1, 2025, in connection with announcing its first quarter 2025 financial results for the interim period ended March 31, 2025, Organon slashed its dividend by 90%, down from 28¢ per share per quarter ($1.16 per share annually) down to just 2¢ per share per quarter (or 8¢ per share annually). According to a quote attributed to Organon's CEO, defendant Kevin Ali, in the press release Organon issued that day, it had 'reset [its] capital allocation priorities to accelerate progress towards deleveraging, enabling a path to achieve a net leverage ratio of below 4.0x by year-end,' emphasizing that Organon's 'primary capital allocation priority' was now 'maintaining lower leverage.' On this news, the price of Organon stock fell more than 27%. The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has extensive experience in prosecuting investor class actions including actions involving financial fraud. You can view a copy of the complaint by clicking here. THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased Organon publicly traded securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Organon 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 Organon class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Organon class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Organon 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 [email protected]
Associated Press
6 days ago
- Business
- Associated Press
INVESTOR DEADLINE NEXT WEEK: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces that Red Cat Holdings, Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit
SAN DIEGO, July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers or acquirers of Red Cat Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: RCAT) securities between March 18, 2022 and January 15, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'), have until Tuesday, July 22, 2025 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Red Cat class action lawsuit. Captioned Olsen v. Red Cat Holdings, Inc., No. 25-cv-05427 (D.N.J.), the Red Cat class action lawsuit charges Red Cat and certain of Red Cat's 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 Red Cat 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 [email protected]. CASE ALLEGATIONS: Red Cat, together with its subsidiaries, provides products and solutions to drone industry. Red Cat's products include, among others, the 'Teal 2' drone, a small, unmanned aircraft system designed to purportedly 'Dominate the Night' during nighttime military operations. The Red Cat class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Red Cat's Salt Lake City facility's production capacity, and defendants' progress in developing the same, was overstated; and (ii) the overall value of Red Cat's Short Range Reconnaissance Program of Record Tranche 2 contract (the 'SRR Contract') was overstated. The Red Cat class action lawsuit further alleges that on July 27, 2023, Red Cat revealed that its Salt Lake City facility could only currently produce 100 drones per month, the facility was still being built, refined, and expanded, and that construction of the facility was only 'substantially completed' and potentially could reach a production capacity of 1,000 drones per month over the next 2 to 3 years, but only with additional capital investments and manufacturing efficiencies realized. On this news, the price of Red Cat stock fell nearly 9%, according to the complaint. Then, on September 23, 2024, the Red Cat class action lawsuit further alleges that Red Cat announced its financial results for the first quarter of fiscal year 2025, reporting losses per share of $0.17, missing consensus estimates by $0.09, and revenue of $2.8 million, missing consensus estimates by $1.07 million. According to the complaint, Red Cat further disclosed that Red Cat 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 Army prototypes impacted Teal 2 sales' because, among other things, Red Cat 'couldn't produce and sell Teal 2 units while retooling [its] factory.' The Red Cat class action lawsuit alleges that on this news, the price of Red Cat stock fell more than 25%. Finally, the Red Cat class action lawsuit further alleges that on January 16, 2025, Kerrisdale Capital published a report alleging that '[t]he SRR contract that Red Cat won in November and preemptively announced without the Army's permission is much smaller and less favorable than management as intimated,' and that '[i]t's highly implausible that a mass-production facility for manufacturing drones has been built at any point in the last two years for less than $1 million.' On this news, the price of Red Cat stock fell more than 21% over two trading sessions, according to the complaint. THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Red Cat securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Red Cat 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 Red Cat class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Red Cat class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Red Cat 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 [email protected]
Globe and Mail
14-07-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
XPLR INVESTOR ALERT: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces that XPLR Infrastructure, LP f/k/a NextEra Energy Partners, LP Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers or acquirers of XPLR Infrastructure, LP f/k/a NextEra Energy Partners, LP (NYSE: XIFR) securities between September 27, 2023 and January 27, 2025, both dates inclusive (the 'Class Period'), have until September 8, 2025 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the XPLR class action lawsuit. Captioned Alvrus v. XPLR Infrastructure, LP f/k/a NextEra Energy Partners, LP, No. 25-cv-01755 (S.D. Cal.), the XPLR Infrastructure class action lawsuit charges XPLR Infrastructure, NextEra Energy, Inc., as well as certain of XPLR Infrastructure's top 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 XPLR Infrastructure 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: XPLR Infrastructure 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. Throughout the Class Period, XPLR Infrastructure operated as a 'yieldco' – that is, a business that owns and operates fully-built and operational power generating projects, focused on delivering large cash distributions to investors. The XPLR Infrastructure class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) XPLR Infrastructure was struggling to maintain its operations as a yieldco; (ii) defendants temporarily relieved this issue by entering into certain financing arrangements while downplaying the attendant risks; (iii) XPLR Infrastructure 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, among other things, resolve those financings; and (v) consequently, XPLR Infrastructure's yieldco business model and distribution growth rate was unsustainable. The XPLR Infrastructure class action lawsuit further alleges that on January 28, 2025, XPLR Infrastructure announced that it would suspend entirely cash distributions to common unitholders and essentially abandon its yieldco model. On this news, the price of XPLR Infrastructure common units fell by nearly 35%, the complaint alleges. THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired XPLR Infrastructure securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the XPLR Infrastructure 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 XPLR Infrastructure class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the XPLR Infrastructure class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the XPLR Infrastructure 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:
