Recent Security Class Actions

According to the Complaint, Direct Digital Holdings, Inc. operates as an end-to-end full-service programmatic advertising platform.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material facts, including that: (1) the Company's transition toward a "cookie-less" advertising environment was accelerated and would impact revenue in 2024; (2) the Company's alternatives to third-party cookies, including planned investments in AI and machine learning to build on first-party data sources, would not be viable alternatives to third-party cookies and similar tracking technologies; (3) the Company did not have adequate solutions to address the impending phase out of third-party cookies by Google; and (4) based on the foregoing, Defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the effectiveness of Direct Digital's platform and related financial results, growth, and prospects.

According to the Complaint, Biogen Inc. is a global biopharmaceutical company that discovers, develops, and delivers therapies for people living with serious and complex diseases worldwide.

In 2023, the Company's Leqembi product, developed in partnership with Eisai Co., Ltd., gained FDA approval as a
treatment for Alzheimer's disease ("AD"). Also in 2023, Biogen announced that it would acquire Reata Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

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, the Complaint alleges Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Biogen had overstated its efforts to enhance its transparency, corporate governance, and compliance controls and procedures, as well as the efficacy of those controls and procedures; (ii) accordingly, Biogen maintained inadequate compliance controls and procedures in connection with its business operations in foreign countries; (iii) Biogen and/or its employees were engaged in unlawful or otherwise improper conduct in several foreign countries; (iv) the foregoing subjected the Company to a heightened risk of governmental and/or regulatory scrutiny and enforcement action, as well as significant legal, financial, and reputational harm; (v) Biogen overstated the strength of its AD-related product portfolio, including the Company's and Eisai's efforts and success in launching and providing access to Leqembi; (vi) Biogen also downplayed the negative impact that the Reata Acquisition would have on its FY 2023 non-GAAP diluted EPS; (vii) all the foregoing were likely to have a significant negative impact on Biogen's 2023 results; and (viii) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

According to the Complaint, Cambium Networks Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, engages in the design, development, and manufacture of wireless broadband and Wi-Fi networking infrastructure solutions.

The Complaint 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, the Complaint alleges Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) that there was a buildup of inventory in the Company's distribution channels; (2) that the Company and its distributors were reasonably likely to offer aggressive discounts to reduce the high channel inventories; (3) that the Company's revenue would decline sequentially until the excess channel inventory was sold through; (4) that Cambium was likely to incur significant charges to writedown excess and obsolete inventory; (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's fiscal 2023 revenue and earnings would be adversely affected; and (6) 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.

According to the Complaint, Teladoc Health, Inc. provides online, direct-to-consumer health service services. One such service is BetterHelp, an online mental health counseling service.

The Complaint 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, the Complaint alleges that: (a) the Company continued to expand its marketing spend throughout 2023, despite public assurances of that it would pull back its advertising spending; (b) increased marketing spend on BetterHelp deteriorated the Company's revenue, with little return for that investment; (c) despite the Company's acknowledgment that increased advertising spend would be marginally inefficient due to market saturation, it continued to grow its advertising spend in the BetterHelp business; (d) despite public statements that there remained "a long runway" for BetterHelp membership growth, BetterHelp's membership stagnated and then decreased in 2023, due to market saturation, largely due to BetterHelp's own marketing.

According to the Complaint, Vestis Corporation was created as the result of its September 2023 spinoff from food service and facilities services provider Aramark, in which Vestis became an independent publicly traded company. Prior to the Spinoff, the company that was to become Vestis operated as the Aramark Uniform Services division of Aramark, providing rental uniforms and workplace supplies, including: uniform delivery; laundering for rental linens, floor mats, and towels; restroom services; and first-aid supplies. Vestis continues to provide rental uniforms and workplace supplies in the United States and Canada.

The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and failed to disclose that: (1) Aramark had historically underinvested in the business that became Vestis; (2) Vestis operated with outdated facilities and an underperforming sales force; (3) Vestis's outdated facilities and underperforming sales force led to "service gaps" that had impeded the Company's levers of growth and had resulted in customer attrition; and (4) as a result of the above, Defendants' statements about Vestis's business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

According to the Complaint, UnitedHealth Group Inc. is a health care and well-being company comprised of two distinct and complementary businesses: Optum and UnitedHealthcare. UnitedHealthcare provides health insurance to individuals, employers, and small businesses and is the largest insurance provider in the United States. Optum provides healthcare-related services, including software solutions, payment services, and data analytics.

On January 6, 2021, UnitedHealth announced an agreement to acquire Change Healthcare and integrate it into its Optum business. Change is a healthcare technology company that provides data solutions aimed at improving clinical decision making and simplifying payment processes across the healthcare system.

On February 27, 2024, the Wall Street Journal reported that the DOJ had re-opened an antitrust investigation into UnitedHealth, investigating the relationships between the Company's various segments, including Optum.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, UnitedHealth repeatedly assured investors that it had taken steps to avoid anti-competitive behavior, including by setting up "robust firewall processes" to prevent customer sensitive information ("CSI") from being shared between UnitedHealthcare and Optum after the merger. The Complaint further alleges that UnitedHealth's assurances articially inflated the price of UnitedHealth's common stock during the Class Period. After the publication of the article in the Wall Street Journal, UnitedHealth's stock price fell precipitously.

According to the Complaint, Sprout Social, Inc. is a software company which develops and operates a web-based social media management platform. The Company's software offers a centralized platform for customers to manage social media outreach, including integrated tools for social engagement, publishing, reporting, and analytics. The Company generates revenue primarily from subscriptions to this social media management platform under a software-as-a-service model.

On August 3, 2023, the Company announced it had acquired Tagger Media, Inc., a leading influencer marketing and social intelligence platform used by enterprise brands and agencies. On September 27, 2023, the Company announced during its Investor Day that it would be "[a]ccelerating our outbound marketing & sales motion in enterprise" and focusing on mid-market and enterprise leadership.

The Complaint 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, the Complaint alleges Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) the Company's sales and revenue growth were not indicative of the Company's growth as it transitioned to an enterprise sales cycle; (2) that the Company faced integration challenges with its acquisition of Tagger; (3) as a result, the Company was "self inducing sales headwinds;" (4) as a result, the Company would revise fiscal year 2024 revenue guidance; 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.

According to the Complaint, Inari Medical, Inc. is a medical device company that specializes in developing, manufacturing and commercializing catheter-based technologies for treating venous thromboembolism ("VTE"), a condition that occurs when a blood clot forms in a vein, usually in the lower leg, thigh, or pelvis.

The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants consistently touted Inari's "record revenue," purportedly driven by "the strength in our core VTE business" while failing to disclose that a significant portion of its expenses were used to compensate medical professionals improperly for using Inari's products. The Complaint further alleges that the Company had been unlawfully compensating health care professionals in violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and Civil False Claims Act and had misled investors regarding business expenses in order to conceal their illicit conduct.

According to the Complaint, Li Auto Inc. operates in the energy vehicle market in China and designs, develops, manufactures, and sells smart electric vehicles. The Company's product line comprises MPVs and SUVs.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Li Auto had overstated the demand for its vehicles and the efficacy of its operating strategy in launching the Li MEGA; (ii) accordingly, the Company was unlikely to meet its Q1 2024 vehicle deliveries estimate; (iii) the foregoing, once revealed, was likely to have a material negative impact on the Company's financial condition; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

According to the Complaint, Harbor Diversified, Inc. describes itself as "a non-operating holding company that is the parent of a consolidated group of subsidiaries, including AWAC Aviation, Inc., which is the sole member of Air Wisconsin Airlines LLC, a regional air carrier. Harbor is also the direct parent of three other subsidiaries: (1) Lotus Aviation Leasing, LLC, which leases flight equipment to Air Wisconsin, (2) Air Wisconsin Funding LLC, which provides flight equipment financing to Air Wisconsin, and (3) Harbor Therapeutics, Inc., which is a non-operating entity with no material assets."

The Complaint alleges that Defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Harbor Diversified's financial statements from May 9, 2022 to the present were misstated due to improper revenue recognition; (2) Harbor Diversified lacked adequate internal controls; and (3) as a result, Defendants' statements about its business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all times.