Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., has reminded stakeholders that class actions have been begun on behalf of shareholders of Provention Bio Inc (NASDAQ: PRVB), Washington Prime Group Inc (NYSE: WPG), Virgin Galactic Holdings Inc (NYSE: SPCE), and RLX Technology Inc – ADR (NYSE: RLX).
Stockholders have until the limits mentioned below to requisition the law court to serve as lead complainant
Stockholders have until the cutoff date mentioned below to request the court to function as a lead complainant.
Provention Bio, Inc.
Class Period: November 2, 2020, to April 8, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 20, 2021
On April 8, 2021, Provention Bio distributed a press release “announcing that the company gained a notice on April 2, 2021 from the [FDA], asserting that, as fragment of its continuing appraisal of the company’s [BLA] for teplizumab. The notice was for the postponement or deterrence of medical [T1D], the FDA has recognized shortages that prevent dialogue of classification and post-marketing necessities/promises at this time.”
The grievance alleges that, through the Class Period, respondents made false and deceptive declarations and failed to reveal that:
Provention Bio’s teplizumab BLA lacked its acquiesced form and would require extra data to secure FDA endorsement.
So, Provention Bio’s teplizumab BLA needed the evidentiary support Provention Bio had led depositors to believe it held.
- Provention Bio had exaggerated the teplizumab BLA’s endorsement forecasts and the commercialization timeline for teplizumab.
- As a consequence, Provention Bio’s public declarations were substantially false and deceptive at all pertinent times.
Washington Prime Group
Class Period: November 5, 2020, to March 4, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 23, 2021
On February 16, 2021, WPG revealed that its functioning enterprise, Washington Prime Group, L.P., had “chosen to hold back an interest sum of $23.2 million outstanding on February 15, 2021 with deference to WPG L.P.’s unresolved Senior Notes due 2024,” and that “WPG L.P. has a 30-day leniency period to make the interest sum before such nonpayment constitutes an ‘occurrence of nonpayment.’” The company further counseled that, in the event of avoidance, certain counterparties to the senior notes “could hasten the unresolved obligation due . . . making such obligation owing and owed, which would consequence in a cross-default with respect to some of WPG L.P.’s or the company’s other obligation.”
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, respondents made substantially false or deceptive statements, as well as failed to reveal material adverse facts about the company’s trade, processes, and forecasts. Precisely, respondents failed to reveal to depositors: (1) that WPG’s monetary situation was worsening considerably; (2) that, as a consequence, there was considerable doubt about the company’s aptitude to meet its wealth edifice responsibilities as they become outstanding; and (3) that, as a consequence of the preceding, Respondents’ optimistic declarations about the company’s commercial, processes, and prospects were substantially deceptive or lacked a reasonable basis.
Class Period: October 26, 2019, to April 30, 2021
Lead Petitioner Cutoff date: July 27, 2021
On October 25, 2019, post-market, Virgin Galactic was shaped via a commercial grouping between Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp. and Legacy Virgin Galactic. As a result, SCH altered its title to “Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc.” and its ticker sign to “SPCE.”
On April 12, 2021, SEC sent a notice stating SPAC securities might need to be categorized as obligations rather than equity for many SPAC dealings, which had beforehand been accounted for as equity in these deals.
Throughout the Class Period, respondents made substantially untrue and deceptive statements regarding the company’s business, processes, and acquiescence policies. Exactly, respondents made untruthful or deceptive declarations or miscarried to reveal that:
- For bookkeeping drives, SCH’s securities were necessary to be treated as accountabilities rather than equities.
- Virgin Galactic had incomplete revelation controls and actions and internal control over financial reporting.
- Consequently, the company inappropriately accounted for SCH warrants that were outstanding at the time of the Business Combination.
- As a result, the company’s public declarations were substantially untrue and deceptive at all relevant times.
Class Period: Pursuant or traceable to January 22, 2021, IPO
Lead Litigant Deadline: August 9, 2021
RLX Technology rationales to be the “No. 1 patented e-vapor company in China,” which is also asserted as its “major possible market.” In January 2021, as part of RLX Technology’s IPO, respondents distributed about 116.5 million ADS to the capitalizing public at $12 per ADS, raising about $1.4 billion in gross proceeds.
On or about March 22, 2021, China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology forwarded outline guidelines settling that e-cigarettes and new tobacco products would be treated like old-style tobacco submissions.
The RLX Technology class-action complaint claims that the Registration Statement confined untrue statements of fact and skipped to state material facts both required by overriding rules and necessary to make the declarations made not deceptive. Among other things, the RLX Technology class action litigation alleges that the Registration Statement distorted and skipped that RLX Technology, at the time of the IPO, that China was working on a national criterion for e-cigarettes that would bring them into line with usual cigarette guidelines.
Former Louisiana Attorney General REMINDS RLX STOCKHOLDERS of Lead Litigant Limit in Class Action Litigations
The former Attorney General of Louisiana, Charles C. Foti, Jr., has reminded stockholders of impending limits in the following RLX class action proceeding.