NEW YORK, Sept. 30, 2020 (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 Baidu, Inc. (NASDAQ: BIDU), Alteryx, Inc. (NYSE: AYX), American Electric Power Company, Inc. (“AEP) (NYSE: AEP), and OneSpan, Inc. (NASDAQ: OSPN). 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.
Baidu, Inc. (NASDAQ: BIDU)
Class Period: April 8, 2016 to August 13, 2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 19, 2020
Baidu is the majority owner of iQIYI, Inc. (“iQIYI”). On April 7, 2020, Wolfpack Research released a report detailing, among other things, how iQIYI had misled investors and failed to disclose pertinent information generally and in its Registration Statement, including: (i) iQIYI overstating its user numbers; (ii) iQIYI inflating its revenues; (iii) iQIYI inflating expenses and prices of assets to conceal its revenue inflation; and (iv) iQIYI misleading financial reporting creating the appearance of a cash generative company.
On this news, Baidu’s ADS price fell $4.46 per ADS, or 4%, to close at $97.33 per ADS on April 8, 2020.
On August 13, 2020, iQIYI announced that the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission sought “the production of certain financial and operating records dating from January 1, 2018, as well as documents related to certain acquisitions and investments that were identified in a report issued by short-seller firm Wolfpack Research in April 2020.”
On this news, Baidu’s ADS price fell $7.83 per ADS, or 6%, to close at $116.74 per ADS on August 14, 2020.
The complaint, filed on August 19, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Baidu misrepresented the financial and business condition of iQIYI; (2) iQIYI had inadequate controls; and (3) as a result, defendants’ public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times.
For more information on the Baidu securities class action case go to: https://bespc.com/BIDU
Alteryx, Inc. (NYSE: AYX)
Class Period: March 6, 2020 to August 6, 2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 19, 2020
On August 6, 2020, the Company announced in a press release its second quarter 2020 financial results, and disappointing growth projections for the third quarter and full year 2020. Therein, Alteryx stated that, for the third quarter, it expected revenue “to be in the range of $111.0 million to $115.0 million, an increase of 7% to 11% year-over-year.” Moreover, for fiscal year 2020, the Company expected revenue “to be in the range of $460.0 million to $465.0 million, an increase of 10% to 11% year-over-year.”
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $47.62, or over 28%, to close at $121.38 per share on August 7, 2020, thereby injuring investors. The stock price continued to decline over the next trading session by $12.15, or 10%, to close at $109.23 per share on August 10, 2020, representing a cumulative decline of $59.77, or 35%.
The complaint, filed on August 20, 2020, 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 was unable to close large deals within the quarter and deals were pushed out to subsequent quarters or downsized; (2) that, as a result, Alteryx increasingly relied on adoption licenses to attract new customers; (3) that, as a result and due to the nature of adoption licenses, the Company’s revenue was reasonably likely to decline; and (4) 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 Alteryx securities class action case go to: https://bespc.com/AYX-2
American Electric Power Company, Inc. (“AEP”) (NYSE: AEP)
Class Period: November 2, 2016 and July 24, 2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 19, 2020
On July 25, 2020, the Columbus Dispatch published an article titled “Columbus utility giant AEP funded dark money spending in HB 6 campaign,” reporting on the Company’s actions in connection with “campaigns now at the center of a racketeering and bribery case . . . .”
On this news, shares of AEP shares fell $4.79 per share, or over 5%, to close at $83.26 per share on July 27, 2020, the next trading day.
The complaint, filed on August 20, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company covertly participated in the “the largest public corruption case in Ohio history”; (2) the Company secretly funneled substantial funds to Ohio political organizations and politicians to bribe politicians to pass Ohio House Bill 6, which benefitted the Company and its coal-fired generation assets; (3) the Company partially funded a massive, misleading advertising campaign in support of HB6 and in opposition to a ballot initiative to repeal HB6 by passing substantial sums through a web of dark money entities and front companies in order to conceal the Company’s involvement; (4) the Company aided in subverting a citizens’ ballot initiative to repeal HB6; (5) as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ Class Period statements regarding the Company’s regulatory and legislative efforts were materially false and misleading; (6) as a result of the foregoing, the Company would face increased scrutiny; (7) the Company was subject to undisclosed risk of reputational, legal and financial harm; (8) the bribery scheme would jeopardize the benefits the Company sought by HB6; (9) as opposed to the Company’s repeated public statements regarding a move to clean energy, it sought a dirty energy bailout; (10) as opposed to the Company’s repeated public statements regarding protection of its customers’ interests, the Company sought an extra and state-mandated surcharge on its customers’ bills; and (11) as a result of the foregoing, 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 AEP securities class action case go to: https://bespc.com/AEP
OneSpan, Inc. (NASDAQ: OSPN)
Class Period: May 9, 2018 and August 11, 2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 19, 2020
On August 4, 2020, OneSpan postponed its second-quarter 2020 earnings release and conference call by one week, attributing the delay to prior period revenue recognition problems relating to certain software license contracts spread out over the quarters from the first quarter of 2018 to the first quarter of 2020. OneSpan further stated that “[t]he net contract assets that originated from a portion of these contracts in prior periods were not properly accounted for in subsequent periods, which caused overstatements of revenue.”
On this news, the Company’s common share price fell $0.46 per share, or 1.40%, to close at $32.50 per share on August 4, 2020.
Then, on August 11, 2020, OneSpan disclosed that it would not timely file its quarterly report for the quarter ended June 30, 2020, with the SEC; reported that same quarter year-over-year revenues had declined; and withdrew its full-year 2020 earnings guidance, which the Company had affirmed one quarter earlier.
On this news, the Company’s common share price fell $12.36 per share, or 39.62%, to close at $18.84 per share on August 12, 2020.
The complaint, filed on August 20, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) OneSpan had inadequate disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting; (ii) as a result, OneSpan overstated its revenue relating to certain contracts with customers involving software licenses in its financial statements spread out over the quarters from the first quarter of 2018 to the first quarter of 2020; (iii) as a result, it was foreseeably likely that the Company would eventually have to delay one or more scheduled earnings releases, conference calls, and/or financial filings with the SEC; (iv) OneSpan downplayed the negative impacts of errors in its financial statements; (v) all the foregoing, once revealed, was foreseeably likely to have a material negative impact on the Company’s financial results and reputation; and (vi) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
For more information on the OneSpan securities class action go to: https://bespc.com/OSPN
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York and California. 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.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com