NEW YORK, Dec. 11, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder law firm, reminds investors that class action lawsuits have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of PG&E Corporation (PCG), Twitter, Inc. (TWTR), Sealed Air Corporation (SEE), and Abeona Therapeutics, Inc. (ABEO). 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.
PG&E Corporation (PCG)
Class Period: December 11, 2018 to October 11, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 23, 2019
On October 12, 2019, the New York Times published an article reporting on PG&E’s efforts to deal with the rolling power cuts it had implemented in California aimed at minimizing wildfire risk. The article reported, among other issues, that “PG&E’s communications and computer systems faltered, and its website went down as customers tried to find out whether they would be cut off or spared.” According to the article, “[a]s the company struggled to tell people what areas would be affected and when, chaos and confusion unspooled outside. Roads and businesses went dark without warning, nursing homes and other critical services scrambled to find backup power and even government agencies calling the company were put on hold for hours.”
On this news, PG&E’s stock price fell $0.35 per share, or 4.36%, to close at $7.67 per share on October 14, 2019.
On October 23, 2019, it was reported that as a last resort to prevent additional wildfires PG&E began shutting off power to 179,000 homes and businesses in 17 northern and central California counties.
On this news, PG&E’s stock price fell $1.00 per share, or 12.2%, to close at $7.20 on October 24, 2019.
The complaint, filed on October 25, 2019, alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) PG&E’s purportedly enhanced wildfire prevention and safety protocols and procedures were inadequate to meet the challenges for which they were ostensibly designed; (ii) as a result, PG&E was unprepared for the rolling power cuts the Company implemented to minimize wildfire risk; and (iii) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
For more information on the PG&E class action go to: https://bespc.com/pcg
Twitter, Inc. (TWTR)
Class Period: August 6, 2019 to October 23, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 30, 2019
On August 6, 2019, Twitter publicly disclosed through a tweet that it recently found issues where certain user settings choices designed to target advertising were not working as intended. Twitter stated, “We recently discovered and fixed issues related to your settings choices for the way we deliver personalized ads, and when we share certain data with trusted measurement and advertising partners.”
However, unknown to investors, while Twitter represented that it “fixed” certain issues relating to user choice settings, defendants failed to disclose that the changes implemented to fix these issues adversely affected Twitter’s ability to target advertising, including the targeting of advertising through its Mobile App Promotion product, which caused a material decline in advertising revenue.
On October 24, 2019, the company disclosed its financial results for the quarter ended September 30, 2019 and conducted a conference call with investors. Twitter’s revenue of $823.7 million was over 5% lower than analysts’ estimate of $874.0 million. Weaker-than-expected advertising revenues caused this revenue shortfall.
During the conference call, Defendant Jack Dorsey (“Dorsey”), Twitter’s Chief Executive Officer, disclosed that software defects caused by the changes implemented before the beginning of the Class Period had negatively affected the Company’s third quarter financial results and that the negative effects on advertising revenue would continue through at least the fourth quarter of 2019.
On this news, Twitter’s shares declined from a closing price of $38.83 per share on October 23, 2019, to close at $30.75 per share on October 24, 2019, a decline of $8.10 per share, or over 20%.
The complaint, filed on October 29, 2019, alleges that, throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) while Twitter represented that it “fixed” certain issues relating to user choice settings designed to target advertising were not working as intended; (2) the changes implemented to fix these issues adversely affected Twitter’s ability to target advertising, including the targeting of advertising through its Mobile App Promotion (“MAP”) product, which caused a material decline in advertising revenue; and (3) as a result, Twitter's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
For more information on the twitter class action go to: https://bespc.com/twtr
Sealed Air Corporation (SEE)
Class Period: November 5, 2014 to August 6, 2018
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: January 2, 2020
On November 5, 2014 Sealed Air filed its quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, which was signed by defendant Stiehl and contained signed certifications by defendants Peribere and Lowe stating that the statements contained therein were accurate and not materially misleading. The Form 10-Q stated that Sealed Air had achieved $59.3 million in net earnings for the quarter.
In subsequent quarterly earnings releases and Forms 10-Q and 10-K, Sealed Air continued to represent that its deductions and accounting treatment of the Settlement were proper and that the Company’s financial results, which had been certified by the Individual defendants, had been fairly and accurately represented in these financial filings in all material respects. In addition, in each Sealed Air Form 10-Q and Form 10-K filed during the Class Period, defendants claimed that the financial statements contained therein were prepared in conformance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”). Sealed Air also continued to cite E&Y’s purported “independence” in recommending that shareholders vote to approve the auditing firm, which shareholders did in every year from 2015 to 2019.
On August 6, 2018, Sealed Air filed its quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the second quarter of 2018, which revealed that the Company had received a subpoena from the SEC requesting documents and information concerning the Company’s accounting for income taxes and financial reporting and disclosures. Analysts widely viewed the SEC investigation as relating to the Company’s tax treatment of the Settlement. The SEC investigation severely undermined the Company’s purported defense to the IRS disallowance proceedings.
On this news, the price of Sealed Air stock immediately fell over 5% to close at $41 per share on August 7, 2018. In the days that followed, the price of Sealed Air common stock continued to decline, falling to just over $30 per share by October 2018.
The complaint, filed on November 1, 2019, alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants engaged in a scheme to deceive the market and a course of conduct that artificially inflated the price of Sealed Air common stock and operated as a fraud or deceit on purchasers of Sealed Air common stock. When the truth about Sealed Air’s misconduct was revealed over time, the value of the Company’s stock declined precipitously as the prior artificial inflation no longer propped up the stock’s price. The decline in the price of Sealed Air stock was the direct result of the nature and extent of defendants’ fraud finally being revealed to investors and the market. The timing and magnitude of the share price decline negate any inference that the losses suffered by plaintiff and other members of the Class were caused by changed market conditions, macroeconomic or industry factors, or Company-specific facts unrelated to the defendants’ fraudulent conduct. The economic loss, i.e., damages, suffered by plaintiff and other Class members was a direct result of defendants’ fraudulent scheme to artificially inflate the price of the Company’s stock and the subsequent significant decline in the value of the Company’s stock when defendants’ prior misrepresentations and other fraudulent conduct were revealed.
For more information on the Sealed Air class action go to: https://bespc.com/see
Abeona Therapeutics, Inc. (ABEO)
Class Period: May 31, 2018 to September 23, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: January 2, 2019
EB-101 for the treatment of recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (“RDEB”) is one of Abeona’s lead programs. From preliminary clinical data and expert input, the Company expected EB-101 to be a potential treatment choice for most wounds, and believes it is currently the only product candidate being evaluated as a treatment for larger wounds.
Results from a completed Phase I/II study that enrolled seven patients with chronic RDEB wounds at Stanford University purportedly showed that EB-101 was well-tolerated and resulted in significant and durable wound healing.
Abeona expected to initiate a pivotal clinical trial evaluating the potential of EB-101 for the treatment of RDEB in the middle of 2019. The so-called VITAL Study would be a multicenter, randomized, Phase III clinical trial assessing ten to fifteen patients treated with EB-101.
On September 23, 2019, Abeona issued a press release announcing receipt of a clinical hold letter from the FDA, “clarifying that the FDA will not provide approval for the Company to begin its planned Phase 3 clinical trial for EB-101 [a/k/a, the VITAL Study] until it submits to the FDA additional data points on transport stability of EB-101 to clinical sites” (the “September 2019 Press Release”). The September 2019 Press Release also disclosed that Abeona had been working with the FDA for at least a year to address issues with the Company’s CMC.
On this news, Abeona’s stock price fell $0.39 per share, or 11.96%, to close at $2.87 per share on September 23, 2019.
The complaint, filed on November 1, 2019, alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Abeona’s Chemical, Manufacturing and Controls (“CMC”) and internal controls and procedures and/or compliance policies were inadequate; (ii) as a result, the Company failed to provide sufficient data points on the transport stability of EB-101 to clinical sites, or else such transport stability was insufficient; (iii) consequently, it was foreseeable that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) would reject approval for the start of the VITAL Study until such issues were addressed; and (iv) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
For more information on the Abeona class action go to: https://bespc.com/abeo
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.