NEW YORK, NY / ACCESSWIRE / July 23, 2019 / Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that class action lawsuits have commenced on behalf of shareholders of the following publicly-traded companies. To determine your eligibility and get free access to our shareholder support tools that provide you with case updates, automated loss calculations and claims recovery assistance, please contact the firm via the links below. There will be no cost or obligation to you.
Bloom Energy Corporation (BE)
Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Bloom Energy common stock pursuant or traceable to Bloom Energy’s July 2018 IPO.
Lead Plaintiff Deadline : July 29, 2019
TO LEARN MORE, VISIT: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/bloom-energy-corporation-loss-form?prid=2565&wire=1
The complaint alleges that Bloom Energy's Registration Statement was materially misleading as it failed to disclose known events and trends that were severely affecting the Company’s business and that made investment in Bloom Energy significantly riskier than presented in the Registration Statement. In particular, the Registration Statement failed to disclose that the Company was experiencing material construction delays. These construction delays would cause system deployments (or “acceptances” as Defendants referred to them) to fall significantly below even the low end of the Company’s previously announced guidance.
While the Registration Statement purported to warn of risks that “may arise,” which could materially affect the Company, in actuality these material negative events were already occurring. As a result, the representations and purported risk disclosures were false and misleading because, by the time of the IPO, construction delays had already impacted or would soon impact Bloom Energy’s ability to deliver acceptances in line with its guidance.
Hecla Mining Company (HL)
Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased March 19, 2018 - May 8, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline : July 23, 2019
TO LEARN MORE, VISIT: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/hecla-mining-company-loss-form?prid=2565&wire=1
According to the filed complaint, during the class period, Hecla Mining Company made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (a) the Nevada operations were hemorrhaging cash due to a multitude of material problems identified by Defendants during Hecla’s extensive due diligence of the Nevada mines before the Class Period, and (b) as a result of these material problems, Defendants had no reasonable basis for their representations that the Nevada operations would be in a position to have positive or self-funding cash flow.
A. O. Smith Corporation (AOS)
Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased July 26, 2016 - May 16, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline : July 29, 2019
TO LEARN MORE, VISIT: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/a-o-smith-corporation-loss-form?prid=2565&wire=1
According to the filed complaint, during the class period, A. O. Smith Corporation made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (a) A.O. Smith had undisclosed business connections and entanglements with UTP through which it funneled up to 75% of its China product sales; (b) A.O. Smith had used UTP to engage in channel stuffing by artificially inflating inventories purportedly sold through distributors that were not based on consumer demand, thereby approximately doubling the normal level of inventory at such distributors; (c) A.O. Smith had used its UTP relationship to artificially inflate the sales figures it reported to investors by as much as 8% and to conceal worsening sales trends that the Company was experiencing in China; (d) A.O. Smith’s sales growth had been primarily in lower margin products as its higher priced products were being undercut by competition in “second-tier” Chinese cities, causing the Company to experience significant margin pressures; (e) A.O. Smith had increased its cash reserves in China to over $530 million in furtherance of its channel stuffing and sales manipulation scheme, encumbering the Company’s ability to repatriate the cash or use it for capital expenditures; and (f) as a result of (a)-(e) above, A.O. Smith’s business, operations, and prospects were significantly worse than publicly represented and the Company was poised for sales and earnings declines in China, its most important international market.
You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn’t require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.
Levi & Korsinsky is a national firm with offices in New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
SOURCE: Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
View source version on accesswire.com: