Workflow
ROSEN, A LEADING LAW FIRM, Encourages XPLR Infrastructure, LP f/k/a Nextera Energy Partners, LP Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action – XIFR, NEP
GlobeNewswire News Room·2025-08-26 18:18

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding purchasers of common units of XPLR Infrastructure, LP (formerly Nextera Energy Partners, LP) about a class action lawsuit and the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline on September 8, 2025 [1]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who purchased XPLR common units between September 27, 2023, and January 27, 2025, may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - A class action lawsuit has already been filed, and interested parties can join by contacting Rosen Law Firm [3][6]. - The lead plaintiff must file a motion with the Court by September 8, 2025, to represent other class members in the litigation [3]. Group 2: Law Firm Credentials - Rosen Law Firm has a strong track record in securities class actions, having achieved the largest settlement against a Chinese company at the time and being ranked No. 1 for securities class action settlements in 2017 [4]. - The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors, including over $438 million in 2019 alone [4]. - Founding partner Laurence Rosen was recognized as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar by Law360 in 2020, and many attorneys at the firm have received accolades from Lawdragon and Super Lawyers [4]. Group 3: Case Allegations - The lawsuit alleges that during the class period, XPLR made false and misleading statements regarding its operations as a yieldco, struggling to maintain operations and downplaying risks associated with financing arrangements [5]. - It is claimed that XPLR could not resolve its financing issues without risking significant unitholder dilution and planned to halt cash distributions to redirect funds to resolve these financings [5]. - The lawsuit asserts that the yieldco business model and distribution growth rate were unsustainable, leading to materially false and misleading public statements by the defendants [5].