GAUZ DEADLINE NOTICE: ROSEN, A LONGSTANDING LAW FIRM, Encourages Gauzy Ltd. Investors with Losses in Excess of $100K to Secure Counsel Before Important February 6 Deadline in Securities Class Action - GAUZ

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding investors who purchased securities of Gauzy Ltd. during the specified class period of the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline for a class action lawsuit [1]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who purchased Gauzy securities between March 11, 2025, and November 13, 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 must move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff by February 6, 2026 [3]. - Investors can join the class action by visiting the provided link or contacting the law firm directly for more information [6]. Group 2: Law Firm Credentials - Rosen Law Firm emphasizes the importance of selecting qualified counsel with a successful track record in securities class actions, highlighting its own achievements, including the largest securities class action settlement against a Chinese company [4]. - The firm has been ranked No. 1 for securities class action settlements in 2017 and has consistently ranked in the top 4 since 2013, recovering hundreds of millions of dollars for investors [4]. - In 2019, the firm secured over $438 million for investors, and its founding partner was recognized as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar by Law360 in 2020 [4]. Group 3: Case Allegations - The lawsuit alleges that Gauzy's defendants made false and misleading statements regarding the financial health of three French subsidiaries, which were unable to meet their debts [5]. - It is claimed that these misrepresentations led to a substantial likelihood of insolvency proceedings and potential defaults under existing senior secured debt facilities [5]. - The lawsuit asserts that the positive statements made by the defendants about Gauzy's business and prospects were materially misleading and lacked a reasonable basis, resulting in investor damages when the truth was revealed [5].