NEW YORK, March 11, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of Standard Lithium Ltd. (NYSEAMERICAN: SLI), Shattuck Labs, Inc. (NASDAQ: STTK), Electric Last Mile Solutions, Inc. (NASDAQ: ELMS), and TAL Education Group (NYSE: TAL). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found at the link provided.
Standard Lithium Ltd. (NYSEAMERICAN: SLI)
Class Period: May 19, 2020 – November 17, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 28, 2022
Standard Lithium explores for, develops, and processes lithium brine properties in the U.S. The Company’s flagship project is the Lanxess project with approximately 150,000 acres of brine leases located in south-western Arkansas.
On May 19, 2020, Standard Lithium announced the successful start-up of the Company's industrial-scale Direct Lithium Extraction Demonstration Plant at Lanxess’s South Plant facility in southern Arkansas (the “Demonstration Plant”), a purportedly “first-of-its-kind plant” using Standard Lithium's proprietary LiSTR Direct Lithium Extraction (“LiSTR”) technology. According to the Company, one of the key features of the LiSTR technology was that it increased lithium recovery efficiencies to more than 90%.
The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the LiSTR technology's extraction recovery efficiencies were overstated; (ii) accordingly, the Company's final product lithium recovery percentage at the Demonstration Plant would not be as high as the Company had represented to investors; and (iii) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On November 18, 2021, Blue Orca Capital published a short report (the “Blue Orca Report” or the “Report”) alleging that Standard Lithium's claims of achieving of 90% extraction rates of battery grade lithium at its Arkansas demonstration site are not supported by previously undisclosed data filed by the Company with the state regulator, which indicated significantly lower recovery rates.
Following publication of the Blue Orca Report, Standard Lithium’s common share price fell $1.86 per share, or 18.84%, to close at $8.01 per share on November 18, 2021.
For more information on the Standard Lithium investigation go to: https://bespc.com/cases/SLI
Shattuck Labs, Inc. (NASDAQ: STTK)
Class Period: October 9, 2020 IPO; October 9, 2020 – November 9, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: April 1, 2022
According to the lawsuit, the materials supporting the IPO and defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Collaboration Agreement with Takeda was not solid; (2) Takeda and Shattuck would “mutually agree” to terminate the Collaboration Agreement in essentially one year; (3) as a result, Shattuck would cease to receive any future milestone, royalty, or other payments from Takeda; and (4) as a result, defendants’ statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
For more information on the Shattuck class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/STTK
Electric Last Mile Solutions, Inc. (NASDAQ: ELMS)
Class Period: March 31, 2021 – February 1, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: April 4, 2022
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (1) ELMS’s previously issued financial statements were false and unreliable; (2) ELMS’s earlier reported financial statements would need restatement; (3) certain ELMS executives and/or directors purchased equity in the Company at substantial discounts to market value without obtaining an independent valuation; (4) on November 25, 2021 (Thanksgiving), the Company’s Board formed an independent Special Committee to conduct an inquiry into certain sales of equity securities made by and to individuals associated with the Company; and (5) as a result, Defendants’ statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
For more information on the ELMS class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/ELMS
TAL Education Group (NYSE: TAL)
Class Period: April 26, 2018 – July 22, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: April 5, 2022
TAL provides K-12 after-school tutoring services in China.
The lawsuit alleges that defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose that: (i) TAL’s revenue and operational growth was the result of deceptive marketing tactics and illicit business practices that flouted Chinese laws, regulations, and policies, and exposed TAL to an extreme risk that more draconian measures would be imposed on TAL; (ii) TAL had engaged in misleading and fraudulent advertising practices, including the provision of false and misleading discount information designed to obfuscate the true cost of TAL’s programs to its customers, the creation of fake customer reviews designed to fraudulently lure new customers to TAL programs, the misrepresentation of teacher qualifications and course qualities, and the marketing of rigged promotional events; (iii) TAL had defied Chinese policies designed to alleviate the burden imposed by tutoring services on students and their families, including by imposing hefty advances and recurring debt payments on course enrollees, by offering courses designed to give affluent students unfair advantages, by holding courses outside of allowable tutoring hours, and by linking for-profit courses to government-mandated schooling; (iv) as a result, TAL was subject to an extreme undisclosed risk of adverse enforcement actions, regulatory fines, and penalties, and the imposition of new rules and regulations adverse to TAL’s business and financial interests; and (v) consequently, TAL’s historical growth was not sustainable or the result of legitimate business tactics as represented, and defendants’ positive statements about TAL’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and lacked a reasonable factual basis.
From March 4, 2021 through March 11, 2021, China held its annual “Two Sessions” parliamentary meetings. Media reports stated that attendees of the ongoing Two Sessions conference had proposed “stricter regulations” to rein in the online education industry, such as regulations aimed at enhancing teacher quality, limiting fee scams, reducing market “abuse” by large players like TAL, and reducing the stress that for-profit tutoring companies had placed on students in the Chinese educational system.
As news of the government’s focus on the after-school tutoring industry spread, the price of TAL ADSs began to drop from $76.04 when the market closed on March 5, 2021, to $56.31 by April 1, 2021, a 26% decline.
Then, on May 12, 2021, news reports revealed that the impending government crackdown on for-profit tutoring companies in China would be much more drastic and far reaching than previously publicly known. Sources stated that anticipated rules would include measures such as banning on-campus tutoring classes, the provision of tutoring services during weekend hours, and the imposition of industry-wide fee limitations.
On this news, the price of TAL ADSs dropped 13% over a two-day period.
Then, on June 1, 2021, Chinese regulators announced they had fined 15 off-campus training institutions, including TAL, for illegal activities such as false advertising and fraud. Among the violations by the 15 offenders were reportedly fabricating teacher qualifications, exaggerating the effects of training, and fabricating user reviews. The regulators gave examples of how TAL’s subsidiary, Xueersi, had advertised false parent user reviews in Beijing and Shanghai. The offending companies, including TAL, were hit with maximum penalties for their illegal business practices, totaling a combined $5.73 million. Officials stated that the crackdown on the for-profit tutoring industry had grown out of the Two Sessions parliamentary meetings held earlier in the year and followed a deluge of complaints against bad industry actors, including 155,000 complaints and reports for education and training services received by authorities in 2020 alone and over 47,000 similar complaints and reports received by authorities in the first quarter of 2021. In addition to the issues outlined above, TAL was reportedly found to have: (i) forced students to pay hefty advances and take on recurring debt payments in violation of Chinese law; (ii) offered courses that gave students unfair advantages in contravention of Chinese government policies; (iii) engaged in illegal bait-and-switch tactics; (iv) misrepresented teacher qualifications and course qualities; (v) mishandled user data; and (vi) rigged promotional events to defraud consumers.
On this news, the price of TAL ADSs dropped approximately 18% over a two-day period.
Finally, on July 23, 2021, China unveiled a sweeping overhaul of its education sector, banning companies that teach the school curriculum from making profits, raising capital, or going public. This drastic measure effectively ended any potential growth in the for-profit tutoring sector in China.
On this news, the price of TAL ADSs plummeted from $20.52 when the market closed on July 22, 2021, to just $4.40 by market close on July 26, 2021, a nearly 79% decline.
For more information on the TAL class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/TAL
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. 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, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Alexandra B. Raymond, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com
