NEW YORK, June 08, 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 LMP Automotive Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: LMPX), Dentsply Sirona, Inc. (NASDAQ: XRAY), IonQ, Inc. (NYSE: IONQ), and Energy Transfer LP (NYSE: ET). 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.
LMP Automotive Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: LMPX)
Class Period: June 29, 2021 – May 19, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 26, 2022
On November 16, 2021, after the market closed, LMP filed a notification of inability to timely file its quarterly report for third quarter 2021. It also identified several material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting, including that “[t]he Company did not maintain a formalized set of accounting policies” and “[t]he Company did not maintain effective controls over the review and approval of journal entries, account reconciliations, review of significant accounts and disclosures, and adequate documentation of management assumptions, estimates and judgments.”
On this news, the Company’s stock price fell $0.74, or 5.5%, to close at $12.66 per share on November 17, 2021.
Then, on March 31, 2022, LMP revealed that it could not timely file its fiscal 2021 annual report “primarily [as] a result of its ongoing evaluation of (i) the proper identification and elimination of intercompany transactions, (ii) estimates of chargeback reserves for finance and insurance products and (iii) various financial presentation matters related to the Company’s business, including as it relates to the presentation, characterization and amounts of such items in prior fiscal quarters.”
On this news, the Company’s stock price fell $0.19, or 3.8%, to close at $4.81 per share on April 1, 2022.
Then, on May 17, 2022, after the market closed, LMP disclosed that it could not timely file its Q1 2021 quarterly report due to the previously announced ongoing evaluation. LMP further disclosed that due to errors in the Company’s quarterly reports during fiscal year 2021, such reports “will likely need to be restated.” The Company also disclosed that these errors may impact “certain previously disclosed material weaknesses in the registrant’s controls over financial reporting.”
On this news, the Company’s stock price fell $0.07 per share, or 1.5%, to close at $4.60 per share on May 18, 2022.
Then, on May 19, 2022, after the market closed, LMP revealed that it would restate the financial statements for quarterly periods in fiscal 2021 “primarily due to the following errors: (i) the improper identification and elimination of intercompany transactions, (ii) incorrect estimates of chargeback reserves for finance and insurance products, and (iii) certain financial statement misclassifications impacting various balance sheet and income statement financial statement captions in the Relevant Periods.” These results caused a decrease in total revenues up to $15 million for third quarter 2021, up to $8 million for second quarter 2021, and up to $1 million for first quarter 2021. As a result, the Company stated that “material weaknesses exist in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were not effective.”
On this news, the Company’s stock price fell $0.20 per share, or 4.4%, to close at $4.26 per share on May 20, 2022.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company engaged in the improper identification and elimination of intercompany transactions; (2) that the Company used incorrect estimates for chargeback reserves for finance and insurance products; (3) that the Company had misclassified certain items in its financial statements which impacted balance sheet and income statement financial statement captions; (4) that there were material weaknesses in LMP’s internal control over financial reporting; (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company overstated its revenue; (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company would restate certain of its previously issued financial statements and results; and (7) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
For more information on the LMP class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/LMPX
Dentsply Sirona, Inc. (NASDAQ: XRAY)
Class Period: June 9, 2021 – May 9, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: August 1, 2022
Dentsply is a dental equipment manufacturer with offices across the United States. Dentsply produces a wide array of dental supplies, ranging from anesthetics, plaque and gum disease prevention, tooth polishers, and artificial teeth. The Company distributes approximately two-thirds of its dental consumable technology and equipment products through third-party distributors.
The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants orchestrated a scheme to inflate the Company’s revenue and earnings by manipulating its accounting for a distributor rebate program in order for senior executives to be eligible for significant cash and stock-based incentive compensation. In order to facilitate this scheme, Dentsply and its executives made numerous false and misleading statements to investors during the Class Period. As a result of Defendants’ misrepresentations, Dentsply’s common stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.
The truth about Dentsply’s misconduct was revealed through a series of disclosures, beginning on April 19, 2022, when Dentsply announced the sudden termination of its CEO Don Casey. Then, on May 10, 2022, Dentsply announced that, following reports from several whistleblowers, the Audit Committee of its Board of Directors had commenced an internal investigation regarding certain financial reporting matters. Specifically, Dentsply disclosed that the Audit Committee was investigating “the Company’s use of incentives to sell products to distributors in the third and fourth quarter of 2021” and “whether those incentives were appropriately accounted for.” Further, the Audit Committee was also investigating allegations that “certain former and current members of senior management directed the Company’s use of these incentives and other actions to achieve executive compensation targets in 2021.” As a result of these disclosures, Dentsply’s share price declined precipitously.
For more information on the Dentsply Sirona class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/XRAY
IonQ, Inc. (NYSE: IONQ)
Class Period: March 20, 2021 – May 2, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: August 1, 2022
On May 3, 2022, Scorpion Capital released a research report alleging, among other things, that IonQ is a “scam built on phony statements about nearly all key aspects of the technology and business.” It further claimed that the Company reported “[f]ictitious ‘revenue’ via sham transactions and related-party round-tripping.”
On this news, the Company’s stock fell $0.71, or 9%, to close at $7.15 per share on May 3, 2022, on unusually heavy trading volume.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that IonQ had not yet developed a 32-qubit quantum computer; (2) that the Company’s 11-qubit quantum computer suffered from significant error rates, rendering it useless; (3) that IonQ’s quantum computer is not sufficiently reliable, so it is not accessible despite being available through major cloud providers; (4) that a significant portion of IonQ’s revenue was derived from improper round-tripping transactions with related parties; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
For more information on the IonQ class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/IONQ
Energy Transfer LP (NYSE: ET)
Class Period: April 13, 2017 – December 20, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: August 2, 2022
Energy Transfer is a Delaware company headquartered in Dallas, Texas. Energy Transfer is a company engaged in natural gas and propane pipeline transport. It was founded in 1996 and became a publicly traded partnership in 2006. The Partnership through its subsidiaries provides transportation, storage, and terminalling services for products like natural gas, crude oil, NGL, and refined products. The Partnership also constructs natural gas pipelines through its various subsidiaries.
On April 13, 2017, the horizontal directional drilling activities ("HDD") for the Rover Pipeline Project, one of the Partnership's natural gas pipeline construction projects, caused a large inadvertent release of drilling mud near the Tuscarawas River in Ohio. On August 8, 2019, Energy Transfer filed its quarterly report on Form 10-Q with the SEC, reporting the Partnership's financial and operating results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2019. This quarterly report disclosed that two years earlier, in mid-2017 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC")'s Enforcement Staff began a formal investigation "regarding allegations that diesel fuel may have been included in the drilling mud at the Tuscarawas River HDD." On this news, the price of Energy Transfer stock declined $0.65, or 4.6% over two trading days, to close at $13.38 on August 12, 2019.
Then, on December 16, 2021, FERC publicly issued to Energy Transfer the Order To Show Cause and Notice of Proposed Penalty, which directed the Partnership to show cause why it should not be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $40,000,000. The order presented the allegation by the Enforcement Staff that the HDD crews intentionally included diesel fuel and other toxic substances and unapproved additives in the drilling mud during its HDDs under the Tuscarawas River. On this news, the price of Energy Transfer shares declined $0.24, or 2.8% over the course of two trading days, to close at $8.25, on December 20, 2021.
The Complaint alleges Energy Transfer concealed and misrepresented that: (a) Energy Transfer had inadequate internal controls and procedures to prevent contractors from engaging in illegal conduct with regards to drilling activities, and/or failed to properly mitigate known issues related to such controls and procedures; (b) Energy Transfer through its subsidiary hired third-party contractors to conduct HDDs for the Rover Pipeline Project, whose conduct of adding illegal additives in the drilling mud caused severe pollution near the Tuscarawas River when the April 13 Release took place; and (c) Energy Transfer continually downplayed its potential civil liabilities when FERC was actively investigating the Partnership's wrongdoing related to the April 13 Release and consistently provided it with updated information about FERC's findings on this matter.
For more information on the Energy Transfer class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/ET
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.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com
