NEW YORK, Aug. 11, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bernstein Liebhard LLP announces that a shareholder has filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of investors (the "Class") who purchased or acquired the securities of Lockheed Martin Corporation ("Lockheed Martin" or the "Company") (NYSE: LMT) between January 23, 2024 and July 21, 2025, inclusive. Should You Join This Class Action Lawsuit? If you purchased or acquired Lockheed Martin securities, and/or would like to discuss your legal rights and options ...

Core Insights - The U.S. has imported 3,834 tons of antimony oxide through Thailand and Mexico in just five months, nearly matching the total amount imported over the past three years, coinciding with China's planned export control policy for minerals by the end of 2024 [1][3] - The surge in imports raises questions about the effectiveness of China's export bans and whether Thailand and Mexico are acting as "bridges" for the U.S. to circumvent these restrictions [1][3] Group 1: Import Dynamics - Thailand and Mexico are not major producers of antimony, yet there has been an unusual increase in antimony product exports from China to these countries, indicating a strategy of "washing" the origin of products [3][4] - The increase in imports from Thailand and Mexico aligns with China's announcement of export controls on critical minerals, suggesting that the U.S. is using these countries as transit points to bypass direct purchases from China [4][6] Group 2: Supply Chain Complexity - The global supply chain is intricate and interconnected, making it challenging to enforce export bans effectively, especially when products are exported to third countries for minimal processing before reaching the U.S. [4][6] - The presence of Chinese capital in many of the new mineral transshipment companies in Mexico raises concerns about the effectiveness of the export controls [4][6] Group 3: Strategic Materials Concerns - Gallium procurement is also problematic, with U.S. companies managing to acquire it from China through undisclosed channels, highlighting the secretive nature of these transactions [6] - The situation underscores the need for China to enhance its regulatory mechanisms to close supply chain loopholes and strengthen its strategic deterrence against attempts to circumvent export bans [6]

Core Viewpoint - NASA is accelerating its lunar nuclear reactor construction plan, aiming to develop a 100-kilowatt fission reactor system for launch by 2030, which is seen as crucial for the Artemis lunar program and a strategic asset in the new space race [1][2]. Group 1: Lunar Nuclear Reactor Development - NASA plans to initiate industry bidding for a 100-kilowatt lunar nuclear fission reactor system, with a target launch by 2030 [1]. - The nuclear reactor is intended to provide a stable energy supply for a lunar base, which is essential for long-term exploration and operations on the Moon and Mars [2][4]. - The reactor's design is expected to utilize uranium fuel and include a multi-layer shielding system to protect astronauts from radiation [4]. Group 2: Challenges and Concerns - Experts express skepticism about the feasibility of deploying a nuclear reactor on the Moon by 2030, citing significant technical and logistical challenges [6]. - Key challenges include ensuring the reactor can operate under extreme lunar conditions, such as temperature fluctuations and low gravity, as well as navigating lengthy approval processes [6]. - The development of materials that can withstand high temperatures and the safe transport of nuclear materials to space are also highlighted as critical hurdles [6]. Group 3: Strategic Implications - The push for a lunar nuclear reactor is partly driven by concerns over the U.S. losing its leadership in space exploration, especially with increasing collaboration between China and Russia on lunar projects [2][3]. - The first country to establish a nuclear reactor on the Moon could potentially claim exclusive rights to certain areas, impacting U.S. interests in lunar exploration [3].

Core Insights - The article highlights the dark side of rare earth gray market trade, particularly focusing on the smuggling of high-purity antimony ingots disguised as ordinary goods, aimed at U.S. military giants like Lockheed Martin [1][3]. Group 1: Smuggling Operations - Nearly 4,000 tons of rare earths have been smuggled through third countries like Thailand and Mexico to the U.S. in just five months, surpassing the total of the past three years [3]. - Antimony ingots were disguised as "iron ore," and neodymium-iron-boron magnetic powder was hidden in tile adhesive, showcasing the ingenuity of smugglers [3]. - A Thai company, "United Industries," shipped 3,366 tons of antimony products to the U.S. in six months, a 27-fold increase compared to the same period last year [3]. Group 2: Profit Margins and Market Dynamics - Prices for rare earth elements like dysprosium and terbium have surged by 200%, exceeding $3,000 per kilogram, driving U.S. companies to engage in the black market [4]. - The profit margin for rare earths through third-country transshipment has risen to 55%, with logistics companies in Thailand and Mexico taking commissions of 12% to 15% [4]. Group 3: Regulatory Responses - In May 2025, China intensified efforts to combat rare earth smuggling, implementing advanced detection technologies and stricter penalties under the new Mineral Resources Law [6]. - Following these measures, U.S. imports of rare earths through irregular channels dropped by 67% within two months [6]. Group 4: Impact on Taiwan and U.S. Military - Taiwan's military industry faces severe challenges due to China's export controls on rare earths, with 96% of its rare earth needs previously met by imports from China [7]. - The lack of critical rare earth elements has led to significant production issues for Taiwan's defense capabilities, affecting various military projects [7]. - U.S. military projects, including the F-35 and B-21, are also experiencing production disruptions due to shortages of essential rare earth materials [9]. Group 5: Challenges in Supply Chain Diversification - U.S. attempts to build a rare earth supply chain independent of China have faced significant hurdles, with production costs in Australia being 300% higher due to a lack of extraction technology [11]. - The reliance on China for rare earth processing remains high, with 80% of U.S. mined rare earths needing to be sent to China for purification [11].

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding investors who purchased Lockheed Martin securities between January 23, 2024, and July 21, 2025, about the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline on September 26, 2025, for a class action lawsuit [1]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who bought Lockheed Martin securities during the specified Class Period may be eligible for compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - A class action lawsuit has already been filed, and those wishing to serve as lead plaintiff must act by September 26, 2025 [3]. - The Rosen Law Firm emphasizes the importance of selecting qualified legal counsel with a successful track record in securities class actions [4]. Group 2: Allegations Against Lockheed Martin - The lawsuit alleges that Lockheed Martin made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose critical information regarding its internal controls and risk management practices [5]. - Specific claims include Lockheed Martin's inability to accurately report its risk-adjusted profit booking rate and its overstated capabilities in fulfilling contract commitments [5]. - The lawsuit asserts that these misrepresentations led to significant investor losses when the true details became public [5].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lockheed Martin Corporation, alleging securities fraud and unlawful business practices related to significant financial losses in various business segments [2][4]. Financial Performance - On October 22, 2024, Lockheed announced a recognition of losses amounting to $80 million in its Aeronautics segment due to higher-than-anticipated costs, leading to a stock price drop of 6.12% [4][6]. - On January 28, 2025, the company reported pre-tax losses of $1.7 billion linked to classified programs, resulting in a net earnings decline from $6.9 billion ($27.55 per share) in 2023 to $5.3 billion ($22.31 per share) in 2024 [5]. - In the second quarter of 2025, Lockheed disclosed $1.6 billion in program losses, including $950 million from its Aeronautics Classified program and additional losses from other projects, causing a stock price decline of 10.8% [7][8]. Legal Proceedings - Investors who purchased Lockheed securities during the class period have until September 26, 2025, to request appointment as Lead Plaintiff in the class action lawsuit [2].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against Lockheed Martin Corporation, alleging securities fraud that affected investors between January 23, 2024, and July 21, 2025 [1][2]. Group 1: Allegations of Fraud - The lawsuit claims that Lockheed Martin lacked effective internal controls regarding its risk-adjusted contracts and profit booking rate [2]. - It is alleged that the company did not have adequate procedures for comprehensive reviews of program requirements, technical complexities, schedules, and risks [2]. - The complaint states that Lockheed Martin overstated its ability to meet contract commitments in terms of cost, quality, and schedule, leading to a likelihood of significant losses [2]. - As a result of these issues, the positive statements made by the defendants about the company's business and prospects were materially misleading [2]. Group 2: Legal Process and Participation - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until September 26, 2025, to request to be appointed as lead plaintiff [3]. - Participation in the lawsuit does not require serving as a lead plaintiff, and class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs [3]. Group 3: Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a strong track record in securities litigation, having secured hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders over the past 20 years [4]. - The firm has been recognized in ISS Securities Class Action Services' Top 50 Report for seven consecutive years as one of the leading securities litigation firms in the United States [4].

LOS ANGELES, Aug. 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz reminds investors that class action lawsuits have been filed on behalf of shareholders of the following publicly-traded companies.  Investors have until the deadlines listed below to file a lead plaintiff motion. Investors suffering losses on their investments are encouraged to contact The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz to discuss their legal rights in these class actions at 310-914-5007 or by email to fcruz@frankcruzlaw.com. Sabl ...

Core Viewpoint - Lockheed Martin has faced significant financial losses due to internal control failures and operational challenges, leading to a series of negative announcements that have impacted its stock price and investor confidence [2][3][4]. Financial Performance - On October 22, 2024, Lockheed Martin announced a loss of $80 million related to a classified program, resulting in a 6.12% drop in share price to $576.98 [3][5]. - On January 28, 2025, the company reported pre-tax losses of $1.7 billion, with $555 million attributed to the Aeronautics program and $1.3 billion to the Missiles and Fire Control business, leading to a net earnings drop from $6.9 billion in 2023 to $5.3 billion in 2024 [4][5]. - On July 22, 2025, an additional $1.6 billion in pre-tax losses was disclosed, including $950 million from the Aeronautics Classified program, resulting in a further decline in net earnings to $342 million [6][7]. Stock Market Reaction - Following the October 2024 announcement, Lockheed Martin's share price fell by $37.63 [3][5]. - The January 2025 announcement led to a $46.24 drop in share price [4][5]. - The July 2025 announcement resulted in a $49.79 decline in share price [6][7]. Legal Implications - A class action lawsuit has been initiated against Lockheed Martin, alleging violations of federal securities laws due to misleading statements and failure to disclose critical operational issues [2][8]. - The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit is an investor with the largest financial interest in the case, representing the interests of the class [8]. Company Operations - The complaints highlight that Lockheed Martin lacked effective internal controls and procedures for managing program complexities and risks, which contributed to the financial losses [2]. - The company has faced challenges in delivering on contract commitments regarding cost, quality, and schedule, leading to significant operational setbacks [2].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against Lockheed Martin Corporation, alleging securities fraud that affected investors between January 23, 2024, and July 21, 2025 [1][2]. Group 1: Allegations - The lawsuit claims that Lockheed Martin lacked effective internal controls regarding risk-adjusted contracts and profit booking rates [2]. - It is alleged that the company did not have adequate procedures for comprehensive reviews of program requirements, technical complexities, schedules, and risks [2]. - The complaint states that Lockheed Martin overstated its ability to meet contract commitments in terms of cost, quality, and schedule, leading to a likelihood of significant losses [2]. - As a result of these issues, the positive statements made by the defendants about the company's business and prospects were materially misleading [2]. Group 2: Legal Process - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until September 26, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff [3]. - Participation in the lawsuit does not require serving as a lead plaintiff, and class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs [3]. Group 3: Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a history of securing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and has been recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States for seven consecutive years [4].