Olaplex Holdings, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Olaplex faced greater headwinds from competitors and economic pressures than it had represented to investors. The Company was unlikely to sustain the momentum of its sales and revenue growth. The Company was unlikely to achieve the growth projections of its IPO documents. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the IPO period. When the market learned the truth about Olaplex, investors suffered damages.

-->

Bird Global, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Bird recorded Sharing Revenue improperly based on trips by customers where collection was not likely to occur. The Company overstated its Sharing Revenue throughout the class period. The Company failed to maintain appropriate internal controls. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Bird, investors suffered damages.

-->

Torrid Holdings Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Torrid enjoyed a temporary surge in demand in the first half of 2021 that was not projected to continue past the IPO period by the Company’s management. The Company suffered from supply chain breakdowns which caused inventory levels to fall below historical norms. Delays in the supply chain damaged the Company’s ability to meet consumer trends. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Torrid, investors suffered damages.

-->

Rent the Runway, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Rent the Runway suffered from continuing business problems related to transportation and labor cost increases. The Company’s active subscriber enrollment had slowed significantly from the growth trajectory it touted during the IPO. The Company would need to significantly increase its marketing expenses to attempt to increase its subscriber base. The Company’s ballooning costs meant it was far less likely to achieve future profitability than it represented to the market. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the IPO period. When the market learned the truth about Rent the Runway, investors suffered damages.

-->

Vintage Wine Estates, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Vintage Wine suffered from material weaknesses in its inventory controls and procedures which left it with no basis to accurately report inventory metrics. The Company overstated its adjusted EBITDA by downplaying its overheard burden in certain quarters. The Company was likely to incur material charges to restate prior earnings. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Vintage Wine, investors suffered damages.

-->

Core Scientific, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Core Scientific suffered from increased power costs due in part to the expiration of a pricing agreement. The Company failed to provide hosting services to Celsius as required by contract. The Company created a surcharge not included in its contract to pass higher power costs on to Celsius. The Company was likely to face legal action from Celsius based on this alleged breach of contract. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Core Scientific, investors suffered damages.

-->

TuSimple Holdings Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. TuSimple engaged in undisclosed related party transactions with Hydron, which was founded by the Company’s co-founder, Mo Chen. The Company shared proprietary technology and trade secrets with Hydron. The Company failed to inform the market about an internal investigation by its Board of Directors into its relationship with Hydron. When the market learned the truth about TuSimple, investors suffered damages.

-->

Unisys Corporation

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Unisys materially overstated its financial guidance for 2022. Once the truth about the Company was revealed, it would be forced to revise its financial guidance downwards. The Company suffered from material weaknesses in its internal controls on financial reporting. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Unisys, investors suffered damages.

-->

Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Eiger overstated its expertise in regulatory drug development to investors. The Company failed to properly assess problems with its TOGETHER trial and determine if the trial could support the peginterferon lambda EUA. Based on these problems with the trial, the FDA was unlikely to approve the Company’s EUA. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Eiger, investors suffered damages.

-->

SolarEdge Technologies, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. SolarEdge misappropriated the design for various components including power optimizers and inverts from Ampt LLC (“Ampt”). Ampt made claims against the Company based on the misappropriation of its designs. The Company faced the threat of legal and regulatory action due to its misappropriation of Ampt’s designs. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about SolarEdge, investors suffered damages.

-->