NEW YORK, July 04, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC), Harbor Diversified, Inc. (OTC: HRBR), Altimmune, Inc. (NASDAQ: ALT), and Sprout Social, Inc. (NASDAQ: SPT). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found at the link provided.
Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC)
Class Period: January 25, 2024 – April 25, 2024
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 2, 2024
On April 2, 2024, after the markets closed, Intel issued a press release which disclosed a retrospective revision of the Company’s financial results under the new Foundry model reporting structure, revealing that the Foundry segment experienced an operating loss of $7 billion on sales of $18.9 billion in 2023, that Foundry revenue in 2023 was $18.9 billion down $8.6 billion from 2022, that the segment’s operating loss included a $2.1 million in lower product profit driven by lower internal revenue.
On this news, Intel’s stock price fell $3.61, or 8.2%, to close at $40.33 per share on April 3, 2024, on unusually heavy trading.
On April 25, 2024, after the markets closed, Intel released its first quarter 2024 financial results, the first quarter reporting the Company’s results under the Foundry model; the results revealed the Company’s Foundry segment declined 10% compared to the same quarter last year, to a revenue of $4.4 billion.
On this news, Intel’s stock price fell $3.23, or 9.2%, to close at $31.88 per share on April 26, 2024, on unusually heavy trading.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) the growth of Intel Foundry Services was not indicative of revenue growth reportable under the Internal Foundry segment; (2) the Foundry experienced significant operating losses in 2023; (3) that the Foundry experienced a decline in product profit driven by lower internal revenue; (4) as a result the Foundry model would not be a strong tailwind to the Company’s IFS strategy; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
For more information on the Intel class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/INTC
Harbor Diversified, Inc. (OTC: HRBR)
Class Period: May 10, 2022 – March 29, 2024
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 8, 2024
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Harbor Diversified’s financial statements from May 9, 2022 to the present were misstated due to improper revenue recognition; (2) Harbor Diversified lacked adequate internal controls; and (3) as a result, defendants’ statements about its business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all times.
For more information on the Harbor Diversified class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/HRBR
Altimmune, Inc. (NASDAQ: ALT)
Class Period: December 1, 2023 – April 26, 2024
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 5, 2024
Altimmune is a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company that focuses on developing treatments for obesity and liver diseases. The Company’s lead product candidate is pemvidutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (“GLP-1”) agonist for the treatment of obesity and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (“MASH”). GLP-1 agonists are medications that help lower blood sugar levels and promote weight loss.
On November 30, 2023, Altimmune announced topline results from its 48-week MOMENTUM Phase 2 trial evaluating pemvidutide for the treatment of obesity (the “MOMENTUM Trial”). According to the Company, at week 48, subjects receiving pemvidutide achieved mean weight losses of 10.3%, 11.2%, 15.6% and 2.2% at the 1.2 mg, 1.8 mg, and 2.4 mg doses and placebo, respectively, with a near-linear trajectory of continued weight loss observed on the 2.4 mg dose at the end of treatment. Defendants touted the significance of these results to pemvidutide’s clinical and commercial prospects as they purportedly evidenced the drug’s viability to compete with other GLP-1 agonists targeting weight-loss. Pemvidutide’s ability to compete with other GLP-1 agonists targeting weight-loss was particularly important to analysts and investors given the Company’s need to establish a strategic partnership with, or otherwise be acquired by, more established biopharmaceutical companies with the cash and capital needed to ensure funding for the drug’s future.
The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Altimmune overstated the potential for pemvidutide to stand out from competing GLP-1 agonists based on the drug’s efficacy and tolerability results observed in the MOMENTUM Trial; (ii) accordingly, the MOMENTUM Trial results were less significant to pemvidutide’s clinical, commercial, and competitive prospects than Defendants had led investors to believe; (iii) as a result of all the foregoing, Defendants had overstated Altimmune’s prospects for finding a strategic partner to develop pemvidutide; and (iv) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On February 13, 2024, Kerrisdale Capital published a report (the “Kerrisdale Report”) alleging that “a deeper examination of Altimmune’s data reveals a drug with little chance of competing against either the approved incumbents or the other GLP-1 agonists progressing through clinical trials.” In particular, the Kerrisdale Report found that “[e]ven if pemvidutide did result in 15.6% weight-loss, that’s not good enough” because competing, already approved GLP- 1 agonists “semaglutide and tirzepatide (Ozempic and Mounjaro) have demonstrated superior weight-loss on a comparable basis, with the added benefit of controlling blood-sugar (which pemvidutide does not),” while noting that “pemvidutide’s tolerability is atrocious” compared to these same drugs. (Emphasis in original.) Accordingly, the Kerrisdale Report concluded that “[w]e don’t think legitimate prospective partners want to spend hundreds of millions of dollars and years of trials pursuing an obvious dead end.”
On this news, Altimmune’s stock price fell $1.94 per share, or 18.65%, to close at $8.46 per share on February 13, 2024.
Then, on April 29, 2024, Bloomberg published an article entitled “Altimmune Down as Guggenheim Sees Overhang in No Partnership,” reporting that “Guggenheim Securities downgraded [Altimmune’s] stock to neutral from buy saying [a] partnership for the biotech’s lead asset pemvidutide look[s] ‘increasingly unlikely.'” In particular, Guggenheim Securities stated that the opportunity to successfully fund pemvidutide’s future as a treatment for obesity through a strategic partnership was “growing increasingly tenuous” and that “[t]he failure of a partner to emerge now five months from the end of Ph[ase] 2 presents an overhang that can no longer be ignored” as “a major partnership or M&A event would have materialized already if pem[vidutide] was viewed as a serious competitor in the growing obesity/ NASH landscapes by potential strategics or investors[.]”
On this news, Altimmune’s stock price fell $0.87 per share, or 11.98%, to close at $6.39 per share on April 29, 2024.
For more information on the Altimmune class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/ALT
Sprout Social, Inc. (NASDAQ: SPT)
Class Period: November 3, 2021 – May 2, 2024
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 12, 2024
On May 2, 2024, after the markets closed, Sprout Social announced the Company’s operating results for the first fiscal quarter of 2024, disclosing that the Company had missed its revenue guidance for the quarter. The company also revised its full year 2024 revenue guidance downward $20 million. The Company’s Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) Joe Del Preto (“Del Preto”) stated the Company had “underestimated the magnitude of enterprise seasonality” and that the Company had also been “self-inducing sales execution headwinds.” During the earnings call held on the same day, the Company’s Present and incoming Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), Ryan Barretto (“Barretto”) disclosed that the Company “made several important strategic decisions heading into Q1” which the Company “thought [it] could manage [] without disruption, but they collectively set us back.” Barretto stated these decisions “happened in Q4 and the execution of it happened in Q1.” Barretto further disclosed the Company’s shift in business had “changed materially” and “affect[ed] revenue recognition and planning” which would now be “heavily weighted to traditional enterprise buying cycles.” Justyn Howard (“Howard”), the Company’s current CEO, also disclosed that the Company had to spend “energy and calorie” in the first quarter on “tactical decisions” including “spending time with the team on Tagger enablement.” Barretto explained further, stating “[f]rom a sales team perspective, the maturity of the sales team, we did a lot of enablement in Q1 across our entire customer-facing or to make sure that we are up to speed with all of the elements of influencer and our Tagger platform.”
On this news, Sprout Social’s stock price fell $19.33, or 40.1%, to close at $28.82 per share on May 3, 2024, on unusually heavy trading volume.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) the Company’s sales and revenue growth were not indicative of the Company’s growth as it transitioned to an enterprise sales cycle; (2) that the Company faced integration challenges with its acquisition of Tagger; (3) as a result, the Company was “self inducing sales headwinds;” (4) as a result, the Company would revise fiscal year 2024 revenue guidance; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
For more information on the Sprout Social class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/SPT
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com
