Turquoise Hill Resources Ltd.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Turquoise Hill suffered stability issues at its Oyu Tolgoi copper-gold mine in Mongolia that were far more severe than represented. The Company’s estimates of the cost of completion and production schedule were impossible to achieve. The Company’s purported “challenging ground conditions” made its production estimates beyond its capabilities. In fact, the Company would require additional financing to complete the project. 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 Turquoise Hill, investors suffered damages.

-->

Reata Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Reata failed to produce MOXIe Part 2 study results sufficient to support marketing approval for omaveloxolone for the treatment of FA from the FDA without additional evidence. It was foreseeable that the FDA would not approve omaveloxolone for the treatment of FA based on the MOXIe Part 2 study alone. 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 Reata, investors suffered damages.

-->

Loop Industries, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Loop’s management encouraged its scientists to misreport the results of the Company’s special process. The Company lacked the technology to break PET down into base chemicals with a 100% recovery rate. The Company was unlikely to commercialize its process in announced partnerships with Indorama and Thyssenkrupp. 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 Loop, investors suffered damages.

-->

Mesoblast Limited

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. An analysis comparing Mesoblast’s Phase 3 trial with three historical trials did not demonstrate the effectiveness of remestemcel-L for steroid refractory acute graft versus host disease (“aGVHD”) because the four studies had different designs. The FDA was likely to require the Company to run additional studies due to this lack of evidence. 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 Mesoblast, investors suffered damages.

-->

Credit Acceptance Corporation

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Credit Acceptance used high-risk loans to top off loan pools that it packaged and securitized. The Company made subprime loans at high interest rates to borrowers it knew could not repay them. The Company’s hidden finance charges raised the interest rate of these loans above the usury rate ceiling set by state law. The Company used aggressive and illegal measures to collect debt from its defaulted borrowers. 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 Credit Acceptance, investors suffered damages.

-->

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Royal Caribbean told investors that the impact of COVID-19 would be minor. The Company falsely stated that global bookings outside of China were strong and not slowing. In fact, the Company was suffering from significant drops in bookings due to customer concerns about COVID-19. While the Company touted rigorous safety protocols, its ships were actually following wholly inadequate procedures to prevent the spread of the virus. 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 Royal Caribbean, investors suffered damages.

-->

Pintec Technology Holdings Limited

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Pintec improperly recorded technical service revenues on a net basis instead of on a gross basis. The Company suffered from material weaknesses in its internal controls on financial reporting. In particular, the Company had poor controls on cash advances to a related party. Based on these weaknesses, the Company misstated its financials for 2017 and 2018. 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 Pintec, investors suffered damages.

-->

Allergan plc

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Allergan failed to inform investors that its CE Mark for textured breast implants and tissue expanders was about to expire in Europe. Based on this fact, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Allergan, investors suffered damages.

-->

Tactile Systems Technology, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Tactile publicly touted a market potential of at least $4 billion for its medical devices while knowing the actual market potential was far lower. The Company engaged in illegal marketing schemes to boost sales growth. This scheme put the Company at risk of a Medicare audit. 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 Tactile, investors suffered damages.

-->

Peabody Energy Corporation

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Peabody failed to follow appropriate safety controls at its North Goonyella mine, placing it at a heightened risk of being shut down. The Company followed a low-cost plan to restart operations that did not address safety and environmental concerns. The Queensland Mines Inspectorate (“QMI”) was likely to mandate a safer, more costly approach. The Company suffered further delays reopening the mine based on this difference. 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 Peabody, investors suffered damages.

-->