Lannett Company, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Lannett faced a high risk of losing its exclusivity arrangement with Jerome Stevens Pharmaceuticals, which made the Company’s reported revenues not sustainable into the future. Based on that fact, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Lannett, investors suffered damages.

-->

Nevro Corp.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Nevro developed its Senza I and II systems using proprietary and confidential trade secrets along with stolen documents fraudulently obtained from competitors. Based on this, the Company’s Senza I and II systems were neither “proprietary” nor “novel.” Nevro’s business practices made it vulnerable to legal and regulatory actions, and its sales growth was not sustainable. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements about its business, operations, and future prospects were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Nevro, investors suffered damages.

-->

Oracle Corporation

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Oracle’s cloud revenues were driven in part by coercive and improper sales tactics. Examples of these practices include threatening clients with audits of non-cloud software usage if the clients did not shift software to cloud computing options. Customer support was also decreased for certain products in an effort to encourage adoption of cloud-based alternatives. Oracle’s sales teams would also threaten dramatic license cost increases if customers utilized another cloud computing provider. These tactics upset customers to the extent that some did not renew certain software licenses, or terminated business relationships with Oracle altogether. When the market learned the truth about Oracle’s business practices, investors suffered damages.

-->

Tesla, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted on August 7, 2018, “Am considering taking Tesla private at $420,” and “funding secured.” The lawsuit alleges that despite Musk’s tweets, no funding had been secured to take Tesla private at $420 per share. Musk also falsely claimed that “investor support is confirmed.” Both the SEC and Tesla’s board of directors are reportedly investigating Musk’s tweets on the matter. 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 Tesla, investors suffered damages.

-->

Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Tetraphase increased the number of patients enrolled in the IGNITE3 trial to 1,200 from its original 1,000 in an attempt to meet the trial’s primary endpoints. The increase in enrolled patients indicates that the existing enrolled population was not adequate to meet these endpoints. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements about business operations and the IGNITE3 trial were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Tetraphase, investors suffered damages.

-->

Sealed Air Corporation

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Sealed Air improperly deducted $1.49 billion related to the settlement of asbestos liabilities from its taxes to artificially inflate its financial performance. The Company switched auditors to help facilitate this fraud. On August 6, 2018, the Company admitted that it had received a subpoena from the SEC related to the Company’s accounting for taxes and financial disclosures. 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 Sealed Air, investors suffered damages.

-->

Ampio Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Specifically, Ampio failed to disclose that the FDA would find the Company’s AP-003-C Phase 3 clinical trial inadequate and not well-controlled. Ampio had not sufficiently completed two pivotal clinical trials for Ampion. Based on these facts, the company’s statements were false and misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Ampio, investors suffered damages.

-->

Maxar Technologies Ltd.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Maxar committed various accounting improprieties, including inflating the value of intangible assets. The Company’s WorldView-4 imaging satellite was equipped with CMG units that were not proper for this application and suffered from faults. 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 Maxar, investors suffered damages.

-->

Impinj, Inc.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Impinj engaged in business activities and conduct that could result in an audit committee investigation and employee complaints. The Company failed to maintain adequate financial and internal controls. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements about its business prospects and operations were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Impinj, investors suffered damages.

-->

Nielsen Holdings plc

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Nielsen demonstrated a reckless disregard towards its readiness for and risks of new privacy rules and regulations such as the EU’s GDPR, as they impact growth prospects. The Company’s ability to maintain financial performance was much more dependent on Facebook and other third-party data providers than it had disclosed, and as a result, would be seriously impacted by privacy rule changes by these firms. Over time, Facebook and other data set providers did become more and more restrictive with access to the data Nielsen relied on. As a result of these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period.

-->