Recent Security Class Actions

According to the Complaint, AST SpaceMobile, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, seeks to develop and provide access to a space-based cellular broadband network for smartphones in the United States distributed through a constellation of Low Earth Orbit satellites. The Company purports to be in the advanced stages of assembling and testing its first generation of commercial BlueBird satellites, the “Block 1 BlueBird” satellites, in advance of launching its space-based cellular broadband network. 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) that production of the Company’s five Block 1 BlueBird satellites had been negatively impacted by two suppliers of key subsystems; (2) that a result, the Company had not substantially completed the production of the Block 1 BlueBird satellites; (3) that, as a result, the Company’s five Block 1 BlueBird satellites were not on track to launch in the first quarter of 2024; 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.

According to the Complaint, Perion Network Ltd. is a global technology company that provides digital advertising products and services. Perion’s most significant search partner and largest source of revenue is Microsoft. The Company entered into its first agreement with Microsoft in 2010 and then entered into its current search services agreement in November 2020, which is effective from January 2021 through December 2024. Perion’s current agreement with Microsoft accounted for 37%, 35%, and 34% of Perion’s revenue in 2021, 2022 and 2023, respectively.The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material facts, including that: (1) Perion’s search advertising business was not a reliable and significant growth driver and was in fact in decline; (2) Perion’s long-term relationship with Microsoft and search services agreement would not provide stability for Perion’s search advertising business; (3) there was an increased risk of Microsoft acting to unilaterally change its advertising pricing and mechanisms to the detriment of Perion while the search services agreement was in place; (4) Perion’s AI technology and Microsoft’s investment in ChatGPT would not protect or grow Perion’s search advertising revenue; and (5) based on the foregoing, Defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about Perion’s search advertising business and related financial results, growth, and prospects.

According to the Complaint, VinFast Auto Ltd. describes itself as “an innovative, full-scale mobility platform focused primarily on designing and manufacturing premium EVs (“electric vehicles”), e-scooters, and ebuses. Founded and headquartered in Vietnam, the Company has since expanded its sales and operations into other markets, including Southeast Asia, North America, and Europe. On May 12, 2023, VinFast announced that it had entered into a business combination with Black Spade, which purportedly "runs a global portfolio consisting of a wide spectrum of cross-border investments, and consistently seeks to add new investment projects and opportunities to its portfolio."On June 15, 2023, VinFast filed a registration on Form F-4 with the SEC in connection with the Merger, which, after several amendments, was declared effective by the SEC on July 28, 2023. Also on July 28, 2023, the Company filed a joint prospectus and proxy statement on Form 424B3 with the SEC in connection with the Merger, which incorporated and formed part of the Registration Statement.On August 14, 2023, the Company consummated the Merger whereby, among other things, Merger Sub merged with and into Black Spade, with Black Spade surviving the transaction as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. Prior to the Merger, the Company operated as a publicly traded special purpose acquisition company.The Complaint alleges that 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 were not prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations governing their preparation. Additionally, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects; specifically, that the Offering Documents and Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) VinFast lacked sufficient capital to execute its purported growth strategy; (ii) VinFast would be unable to meet its 2023 delivery targets; (iii) accordingly, VinFast had overstated the strength of its business model and operational capabilities, as well as its post-Merger business and/or financial prospects; and (iv) as a result, the Offering Documents and Defendants' public statements throughout the Class Period were materially false and/or misleading and failed to state information required to be stated therein.

According to the Complaint, QuidelOrtho Corporation manufactures and sells diagnostic healthcare products in the areas of immunoassay and molecular testing, clinical chemistry, and transfusion medicine. Since 2020, when COVID-19 became a pandemic, QuidelOrtho’s respiratory business began generating substantial revenue from the sale of COVID-19 detection tests. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants misled investors by making statements that were false and misleading when made because they knew or deliberately disregarded and failed to disclose the following adverse facts about QuidelOrtho’s business, operations, and prospects: (a) that QuidelOrtho sold more COVID-19 tests to its distributors and pharmacy chain customers than they could resell to healthcare providers and end customers; (b) that excess inventories of COVID-19 tests existed throughout the supply chain; (c) that, as a result of (a)-(b), QuidelOrtho’s distributors and pharmacy chain customers were poised to significantly reduce their COVID-19 test orders; (d) that undisclosed problems created a heightened risk that the Savanna RVP4 Test would experience a delayed commercial launch in the United States; and (e) that, as a result of (a)-(d), Defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about QuidelOrtho’s business, financials, and growth trajectory.

According to the Complaint, Sonder Holdings Inc. engages in hospitality services. It operates and manages various accommodations that are suitable for one night and extended stays. The Complaint alleges that Defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Sonder failed to disclose all issues with its internal controls; (2) Sonder’s financial statements for the 2022 Annual Report and the interim periods ended March 31, June 30, and September 30, 2023 contained material errors in the way Sonder accounted for the valuation and impairment of operating lease right-of-use (“ROU”) assets; (3) as a result, Sonder would need to restate its previously issued financial statements for those periods; and (4) as a result, Defendants’ statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

According to the Complaint, Ocugen Inc. is a biotechnology company.After market hours on April 1, 2024, the Company filed with the SEC a Notification of Late Filing on Form 12b-25, stating that "in connection with the preparation of the financial statements of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2023, the Company identified certain accounting errors relating to the application of U.S. GAAP to certain agreements with one of its business partners related to a collaboration agreement. As a result, the Company intends to restate its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2022 and for each of the first three quarters of 2022 and 2023 in the 2023 Form 10-K, the review and preparation of which is currently ongoing."The Complaint alleges that Defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Ocugen’s financial statements from May 8, 2020 to the present were materially misstated; (2) Ocugen did not have 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.

According to the Complaint, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc. is a clinical-stage immunotherapy and targeted oncology company that focuses on the acquisition, development, and commercialization of novel treatments for patients with solid tumor cancers in the U.S. and internationally. Checkpoint’s lead antibody product candidate is cosibelimab for the treatment of selected recurrent or metastatic cancers, including metastatic cSCC and locally advanced cSCC. 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) Checkpoint had overstated its oversight of, and/or its establishment of adequate manufacturing standards and controls over, its third-party contract manufacturers; (ii) accordingly, there were one or more issues with the Company’s third-party contract manufacturing organization (“CMO”) for cosibelimab; (iii) all the foregoing reduced the likelihood that the FDA would approve the cosibelimab BLA in its present form; (iv) as a result, the manufacturing, regulatory, and commercial prospects of cosibelimab were overstated; and (v) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

According to the Complaint, Luna Innovations Incorporated is a technology company that is focused on fiber optics. It creates products targeted towards the aerospace, automotive, and communications industries, among others. The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Luna Innovations financial statements from August 10, 2023 to the present included false figures as a result of improper revenue recognition; (2) as a result, Luna Innovations would need to restate its previously filed financial statements from August 10, 2023 to November 14, 2023; (3) Luna Innovations lacked adequate internal controls; and (4) 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.

According to the Complaint, HireRight Holdings Corporation provides technology-driven workforce risk management and compliance solutions to a customer base characterized as a “diverse set of organizations, from large-scale multinational businesses to small and medium-sized businesses, across a broad range of industries.” The Company offers background screening, verification, identification, monitoring, and drug and health screening services for customers under the HireRight brand name and boasts a purportedly “robust pipeline of opportunities developed by [its] sales team to continue to attract new customers and take share in the market.” On October 6, 2021, HireRight filed the Registration Statement on Form S-1 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which, after an amendment, was declared effective by the SEC on October 28, 2021. On November 1, 2021, HireRight filed the Prospectus on Form 424B4 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which incorporated and formed part of the Registration Statement. That same day, pursuant to the Offering Documents, HireRight’s common stock began publicly trading on the NYSE.The Complaint alleges that 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 Complaint alleges the Offering Documents made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) HireRight was exposed to customers with significant employment and hiring risk and the Company derived greater revenue growth from existing client hiring than from new client hiring; (ii) as a result, the Company's revenue growth was unsustainable to the extent that it relied on the stability of its current customers' hiring and/or the profitability of securing new customers; (iii) accordingly, HireRight had overstated its post-IPO business and/or prospects; and (iv) as a result, Defendants' statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

According to the Complaint, bluebird bio, Inc. is a biotechnology company that researches, develops, and commercializes gene therapies for severe genetic diseases.On April 24, 2023, Defendants announced submission of its Biologics License Application (BLA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for lovotibeglogene autotemcel (lovo-cel) gene therapy in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) ages 12 and older who have a history of vaso-occlusive events (VOEs). The BLA also included a request for priority review, which, if granted, would shorten the FDA’s review of the application to six months from the time of filing, versus a standard review timeline of 10 months. The Complaint alleges that the Company’s announcement provided investors with false and misleading information in order to bolster investor expectations and share prices. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants created the false impression that: (i) they could obtain FDA approval for lovocel without any box warnings for haematological malignancies; (ii) they would be granted a priority review voucher by the FDA and in turn sell it in order to strengthen their financial position for the lovocel launch; (iii) as a result, the Company had significantly overstated Lyfgenia’s clinical and/or commercial prospects; and (iv) therefore, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times, and that as a result, Plaintiff and other shareholders purchased the Company’s securities at artificially inflated prices.