Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Core Scientific, Torrid, Olaplex, and Bird and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm


NEW YORK, Jan. 03, 2023 (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 Core Scientific, Inc. (NASDAQ: CORZ), Torrid Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: CURV), Olaplex Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: OLPX), and Bird Global, Inc. (NYSE: BRDS). 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.

Core Scientific, Inc. (NASDAQ: CORZ)

Class Period: January 3, 2022 - October 26, 2022

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: January 13, 2023

Core Scientific is a blockchain computing data center provider and digital asset mining company. It mines digital assets for its own account and provides hosting services for other large-scale miners. It became a public company via business combination with Power & Digital Infrastructure Acquisition Corp. (“XPDI”) consummated on January 19, 2022 (the “Business Combination”).

On March 3, 2022, Culper Research published a report about Core Scientific alleging, among other things, that the Company had overstated its profitability and that the Company’s largest customer lacked the financial resources to deliver the rigs pursuant to its contract.

On this news, Core Scientific’s stock fell $0.72, or 9.4%, to close at $6.98 on March 3, 2022, thereby injuring investors.

On September 28, 2022, Celsius Network LLC and related entities filed a motion to enforce the automatic stay and for civil contempt in bankruptcy proceedings alleging that Core Scientific “has knowingly and repeatedly violated the automatic stay provisions” by refusing to perform its contractual obligations, threatening to terminate the companies’ agreement, and adding improper surcharges.

On this news, Core Scientific’s stock price fell $0.15, or 10.3%, to close at $1.30 on September 29, 2022, thereby injuring investors.

On October 27, 2022, before the market opened, Core Scientific disclosed that “given the uncertainty regarding the Company’s financial condition, substantial doubt exists about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern,” and that it is exploring alternatives to its capital structure. Moreover, the Company held 24 bitcoins, compared to 1,051 bitcoins as of September 30, 2022.

On this news, Core Scientific’s stock fell $0.789, or 78.1%, to close at $0.221 per share on October 27, 2022, on unusually high 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, due in part to the expiration of a favorable pricing agreement, the Company was experiencing increasing power costs; (2) that the Company’s largest customer, Gryphon, lacked the financial resources to purchase the necessary miner rigs for Core Scientific to host; (3) that the Company was not providing hosting services to Celsius as required by their contract; (4) that the Company had implemented an improper surcharge to pass through power costs to Celsius; (5) that, as a result of the foregoing alleged breaches of contract, the Company was reasonably likely to incur liability to defend itself against Celsius; (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s profitability would be adversely impacted; (7) that, as a result, there was likely substantial doubt as to the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern; (8) and that as a result of the foregoing, Defendant’s positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

For more information on the Enviva class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/CORZ

Torrid Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: CURV)

Class Period: Pursuant to the company's July 2021 IPO

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: January 17, 2022

Torrid is a direct-to-consumer brand of women's plus-size apparel and intimates. Leading up to the IPO, Torrid claimed to be experiencing rapid sales growth and an impressive recovery following a temporary downturn in the face of the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, which began in March 2020.

However, as alleged in the complaint, the Registration Statement for the IPO created the misleading impression that Torrid's impressive growth trajectory was then continuing and expected to continue following the IPO. Specifically, the Registration Statement failed to disclose that the following adverse facts existed at the time of the IPO: (i) in the first half of 2021, Torrid had experienced a temporary surge in demand as a result of changed consumer behaviors in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and government stimulus and that such ephemeral demand trends had dissipated and were not internally projected to continue following the IPO; (ii) Torrid was suffering from severe supply chain disruptions caused by the emergence of the Delta variant of COVID-19, which had first emerged in May 2021; (iii) Torrid was running materially below historical inventory levels as a result of supply chain disruptions; (iv) as a result, Torrid did not have sufficient inventory to meet expected consumer demand for its fiscal third quarter of 2021; (v) as a result, late inventory arrival had materially impaired the Company from effectively matching consumer buying trends, creating an undisclosed risk of increased markdowns and promotional activities necessary to sell undesirable inventory; (vi) Torrid's CFO planned to retire shortly after the IPO; and (vii) as a result of the above, the Registration Statement's representations regarding Torrid's historical financial and operational metrics and purported market opportunities did not accurately reflect the actual business, operations, financial results, and trajectory of the Company at the time of the IPO, and were materially false and misleading and lacked a reasonable factual basis.

By the end of September 2022, the price of Torrid stock had fallen to a low of just $4.06 per share, over 80% below the IPO price.

For more information on the Torrid action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/CURV

Olaplex Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: OLPX)

Class Period: Pursuant to the company's September 30, 2021 IPO

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: January 17, 2022

Olaplex was founded in 2014 and is headquartered in Santa Barbara, California. Olaplex manufactures and sells hair care products. The Company offers hair care shampoos and conditioners for use in treatment, maintenance, and protection of hair. Olaplex purports to participate in the “prestige segment” of the haircare market, which the Company claims is “expected to be the fastest growing segment of the global haircare market from 2020 to 2025.”

On August 27, 2021, Olaplex filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which, after several amendments, was declared effective by the SEC on September 29, 2021 (the “Registration Statement”).

On October 1, 2021, Olaplex filed a prospectus on Form 424B4 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which incorporated and formed part of the Registration Statement (collectively, the “Offering Documents”).

Pursuant to the IPO, Olaplex issued 73,700,000 shares of its common stock to the public at the Offering price of $21.00 per share for approximate proceeds of $1,466,445,750 to the Company, after applicable underwriting discounts and commissions.

The Offering Documents were negligently prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading and was not prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations governing its preparation. Specifically, the Offering Documents made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) macroeconomic pressures and competition in the haircare market were more robust than the Company had represented to investors; (ii) accordingly, the Company was unlikely to maintain its sales and revenue momentum; and (iii) as a result, it was unlikely that the Company would be able to achieve the financial and operational growth projected in the Offering Documents; and (iv) as a result, the Offering Documents were materially false and/or misleading and failed to state information required to be stated therein.

On September 29, 2022, a Piper Sandler analyst downgraded Olaplex to Neutral from Overweight, stating that her work revealed that “competition and misinformation pose growing risks to the company.” In addition, the analyst indicated that she anticipated investments in marketing and education were needed to offset the headwinds and that “little room for valuation upside given the risks at play.”

On this news, Olaplex’s stock price fell $1.33 per share, or 12.15%, to close at $9.62 per share on September 29, 2022.

Then, on October 18, 2022, Olaplex issued a press release in which “the Company revised its guidance for the 2022 fiscal year”. Olaplex said it now expects fiscal year 2022 revenue between $704 million and $711 million, significantly down from its prior guidance range of $796 million to $826M. Olaplex stated that “[t]he Company’s updated guidance primarily reflects a slowdown in sales momentum that it attributes to macro-economic pressures, increased competitive activity including discounting, and a moderation in new customer acquisition, as well as inventory rebalancing across certain customers which the Company believes are in response to these same macro-economic pressures.”

On this news, Olaplex’s stock price fell $5.55 per share, or 56.69%, to close at $4.24 per share on October 19, 2022.

As of the time this complaint was filed, the price of Olaplex common stock continues to trade below the Offering price of $21.00 per share, damaging investors.

As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of Olaplex’s securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages.

For more information on the Olaplex action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/OLPX

Bird Global, Inc. (NYSE: BRDS)

Class Period: May 14, 2021 - November 14, 2022

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: January 17, 2023

On November 14, 2022, Bird filed attached to a Form 8-K announcing it would restate its consolidated financial statements for certain periods due to issues concerning the recognition of Sharing Revenue. In pertinent part, the press release stated:

On November 11, 2022, the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Audit Committee”) of Bird Global, Inc. (the “Company”), after discussion with management, determined that (i) the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, and for the years then ended, and quarterly periods within those years, included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on March 15, 2022, (ii) its condensed consolidated financial statements as of March 31, 2022, and for the three months then ended, included in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on May 16, 2022 and (iii) its condensed consolidated financial statements as of June 30, 2022, and for the three and six months then ended, included in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on August 15, 2022 (collectively, the “Original Filings”, and each such quarterly or annual period covered therein, an “impacted period”), should no longer be relied upon. Similarly, any previously furnished or filed reports, related earnings releases, investor presentations or similar communications of the Company describing the Company’s financial results contained in the Original Filings should no longer be relied upon. The determination results from an error identified in connection with the preparation of the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements as of September 30, 2022, and the three and nine months then ended, related to its business system configuration that impacted the recognition of revenue on certain trips completed by customers of its Sharing business (“Rides”) for which collectability was not probable. Specifically, for certain customers with insufficient preloaded “wallet” balances, the Company’s business systems recorded revenue for uncollected balances following the completion of certain Rides that should not have been recorded. The Company believes the error resulted in an overstatement of Sharing revenue in the consolidated statements of operations for the impacted periods and an understatement of deferred revenue in the consolidated balance sheets as of the end of each impacted period. The Company intends to amend the Original Filings as soon as practicable. In connection with the restatement, management has reevaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. Management has concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are not effective at a reasonable assurance level, due to a material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting related to the ineffective design of controls around its business systems that resulted in the recording of revenue for uncollected balances following the completion of certain Rides that should not have been recorded. The Company is in the process of designing and implementing controls to remediate these deficiencies. (Emphasis added.)

On this news, share prices of Bird plummeted $0.069 per share, or over 15%, from the prior trading date to close on November 14, 2022, at $0.364 per share, damaging investors.

As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company’s securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages.

For more information on the Bird class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/BRDS

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