NEW YORK, Feb. 13, 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 Reata Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: RETA), Desktop Metal, Inc. (NYSE: DM), DocuSign, Inc. (NASDAQ: DOCU), and Arrival SA (NASDAQ: ARVL). 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.
Reata Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: RETA)
Class Period: November 14, 2016 – December 8, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 18, 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 FDA had raised concerns regarding the validity of the clinical study designed to measure the efficacy and safety of bardoxolone for the treatment of chronic kidney disease caused by Alport syndrome; (2) that, as a result, there was a material risk that Reata’s NDA would not be approved; and (3) 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 Reata class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/RETA
Desktop Metal, Inc. (NYSE: DM)
Class Period: February 17, 2021 – November 15, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 22, 2022
On February 16, 2021, the Company acquired EnvisionTEC, Inc. and certain of its affiliates (collectively, “EnvisionTEC”), a provider of volume production photopolymer 3D printing solutions for end use parts.
On November 8, 2021, after the market closed, Desktop Metal disclosed that it was conducting an internal investigation into certain matters, including “manufacturing and product compliance practices and procedures with respect to a subset of its photopolymer equipment and materials at its EnvisionTec US LLC facility.” The Company also stated that the Chief Executive Officer of EnvisionTec US LLC had resigned.
On this news, the Company’s stock fell $0.39, or 4%, to close at $8.81 per share on November 9, 2021.
Then, on November 15, 2021, after the market closed, the Company stated that it would notify the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) of “compliance issues with certain shipments of EnvisionTEC’s Flexcera dental resins and its PCA4000 curing box.”
On this news, the Company’s stock fell $1.19, or 15%, to close at $6.83 per share on November 16, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume.
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 there were deficiencies in EnvisionTEC’s manufacturing and product compliance practices and procedures; (2) that the foregoing deficiencies presented a material risk to the commercialization of EnvisionTEC’s products; and (3) 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 Desktop Metal class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/DM
DocuSign, Inc. (NASDAQ: DOCU)
Class Period: March 27, 2020 – December 2, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 22, 2022
The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on DocuSign’s business was positive, not negative; (2) DocuSign misrepresented the role that the Covid-19 pandemic had on its growth; (3) DocuSign downplayed the impact that a ‘return to normal’ would have on the Company’s growth and business; and (4) as a result, defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On this news, DocuSign’s stock price plummeted $98.73 per share, or over 42%, to close at $135.09 per share on December 3, 2021, damaging investors.
For more information on the DocuSign class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/DOCU
Arrival SA (NASDAQ: ARVL)
Class Period: November 18, 2020 – November 19, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 22, 2022
On November 8, 2021, Arrival announced the Company’s financial results for the third quarter of 2021, including a loss of €26 million, and adjusted EBITDA loss for the quarter of €40 million. The Company also significantly scaled back its long-term projections, pushing its production and sales timelines into later time periods.
On this news, shares of Arrival plummeted $4.33, or 24%, to close at $13.46 on November 10, 2021.
Only a week later, on November 17, 2021, Arrival announced a $200 million offering of green convertible senior notes due 2026, intended to finance the development of EVs. On the same day, November 17, 2021, Arrival announced the commencement of an underwritten public offering of 25 million ordinary shares pursuant to a registration statement on Form F-1 filed with the SEC in a bid to raise around $330 million in cash.
On this news, Arrival shares again dropped $0.82, or approximately 8%, to close at $9.91 on November 18, 2021.
The Complaint alleges Arrival made false and misleading statements to the public throughout the Class Period and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operational, and financial prospects. Specifically, Arrival made false and/or misleading statements concerning: (i) the Company would record a substantially greater net loss and adjusted EBITDA loss in the third quarter of 2021 compared to the third quarter of 2020; (ii) the Company would experience far greater capital and operational expenses required to operate and deploy its microfactories and manufacture EVs than disclosed; (iii) the Company would not capitalize on or achieve profitability or provide meaningful revenue in the time periods disclosed; (iv) the Company would not achieve its production and sales volumes; (v) the Company would not meet the disclosed production rollout deadlines; (vi) accordingly, the Company materially overstated its financial and operational position and/or prospects; and (vii) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
For more information on the Arrival class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/ARVL
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
