Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against James Hardie Industries plc for alleged violations of federal securities laws during the specified class period [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit seeks damages for investors who purchased James Hardie securities between May 20, 2025, and August 18, 2025 [2]. - The complaint alleges that James Hardie made materially false and misleading statements regarding the demand for its North America Fiber Cement segment, which was actually experiencing weakening demand due to distributor inventory destocking known to the Company by April and early May 2025 [3]. - On August 19, 2025, James Hardie disclosed a 12% sales decline in the segment, attributing it to "normalization of channel inventories," which led to a more than 34% drop in the Company's share price, damaging investors [3]. Group 2: Next Steps for Investors - Investors who suffered losses in James Hardie have until December 23, 2025, to request to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the class action [4]. - Participation in any recovery does not require serving as lead plaintiff [4]. Group 3: Legal Representation - Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC operates on a contingency fee basis, meaning they will only seek reimbursement for expenses and attorneys' fees if successful [5]. - The firm has a history of recovering hundreds of millions of dollars for investors in securities fraud class actions [6].

Core Viewpoint - A securities class action lawsuit has been filed against Fortinet, Inc. for allegedly making false and misleading statements regarding its business operations and product refresh cycle during the specified Class Period from November 8, 2024, to August 6, 2025 [1][2]. Allegations Against Fortinet - The lawsuit claims that Fortinet misrepresented the profitability of its product refresh cycle, stating it would be lucrative despite it consisting of old products that were only a "small percentage" of the company's business [2]. - It is alleged that Fortinet did not have a clear understanding of the actual number of FortiGate firewalls eligible for upgrades, which misled investors [2]. - The company reportedly misrepresented the momentum of the refresh cycle, claiming it would gain traction over two years while actually pushing through about half of it in just a few months by the end of Q2 2025 [2]. - As a result of these actions, the statements made by Fortinet regarding its business, operations, and future prospects were materially false and misleading [2]. Lead Plaintiff Process - Investors in Fortinet have until November 21, 2025, to seek appointment as a lead plaintiff representative in the class action, which involves directing the litigation on behalf of all class members [3]. - The lead plaintiff is typically the investor or group of investors with the largest financial interest in the case and must select counsel to represent the class [3]. Firm Background - Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP is known for prosecuting class actions and has a reputation for recovering billions for victims of corporate misconduct [4].

Core Points - Tronox Holdings plc is facing a class action securities lawsuit due to alleged securities fraud that occurred between February 12, 2025, and July 30, 2025 [1] - The lawsuit claims that Tronox provided misleading statements about its commercial division's performance while failing to accurately forecast demand for its products, leading to a significant decline in sales and a lowered financial outlook [2] - Following the announcement of poor financial results for Q2 2025, Tronox's stock price dropped approximately 38% in one day, from $5.14 to $3.19 per share [2] Company Performance - Tronox's Q2 2025 financial results revealed a significant reduction in TiO2 sales, attributed to a weaker coatings season and increased competition [2] - The company revised its full-year revenue guidance downward and cut its dividend by 60% as a result of the sales decline [2] Legal Proceedings - Investors who suffered losses during the specified period have until November 3, 2025, to request to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the class action [3] - Participation in the lawsuit does not require any out-of-pocket costs for class members [3] Legal Representation - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a strong track record in securities litigation, having secured hundreds of millions for shareholders over the past 20 years [4]

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against Semler Scientific, Inc. for alleged securities fraud affecting investors between March 10, 2021, and April 15, 2025 [2][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Semler Scientific failed to disclose a significant investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice regarding violations of the False Claims Act, while discussing potential violations in hypothetical terms [3]. - Defendants' public statements are alleged to have been materially false and misleading throughout the relevant period [3]. Group 2: Investor Information - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until October 28, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff, although participation in any recovery does not require serving as a lead plaintiff [4]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees [4]. Group 3: Legal Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a history of securing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and is recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the U.S. [5].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, alleging securities fraud that affected investors between March 10, 2024, and September 29, 2025 [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The complaint claims that the defendants made false statements regarding the company's drug candidate SLK, asserting that it shares molecular targets with BIMZELX and that SLK's unique Nanobody structure does not provide superior clinical benefits [2]. - It is alleged that the supposed increased tissue penetration of SLK does not translate to clinical efficacy, indicating a lack of reasonable basis for the positive statements made about SLK's superiority over traditional monoclonal antibodies [2]. Group 2: Investor Information - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until December 15, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff, although participation in any recovery does not require serving as a lead plaintiff [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees, emphasizing that there is no cost or obligation to participate [3]. Group 3: Legal Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky 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].

Core Viewpoint - Fly-E Group, Inc. is facing a class action securities lawsuit due to alleged securities fraud that negatively impacted investors between July 15, 2025, and August 14, 2025 [1][2]. Summary by Relevant Sections Class Action Details - The lawsuit claims that Fly-E provided overly positive statements while concealing material adverse facts about the safety of its lithium batteries, which adversely affected E-vehicle sales revenue [2]. - On August 14, 2025, Fly-E disclosed a 32% decrease in net revenues, primarily due to a drop in total units sold, linked to recent lithium-battery accidents involving E-Bikes and E-Scooters [2]. - Following this disclosure, Fly-E's stock price plummeted from $7.76 per share to $1.00 per share, marking an approximate 87% decline in just one day [2]. Next Steps for Investors - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until November 10, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff, although participation does not require serving in this role [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees [3]. Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a history of securing significant recoveries for shareholders and is recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against Lantheus Holdings, Inc. for alleged securities fraud affecting investors between February 26, 2025, and August 5, 2025 [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that the defendants made false statements and concealed information regarding the company's revenue outlook and growth potential, particularly related to Pylarify's sales growth and market dynamics [2]. - It is alleged that Lantheus did not accurately understand the pricing and competitive dynamics of Pylarify's market, contrary to the optimistic reports provided by the company [2]. Group 2: Investor Information - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until November 10, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff, although participation in any recovery does not require serving as a lead plaintiff [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees [3]. Group 3: Legal Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a history of securing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and is recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against Cytokinetics, alleging securities fraud related to misleading statements about the New Drug Application (NDA) for aficamten, which may have led to significant investor losses [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Cytokinetics made materially false and misleading statements regarding the expected timeline for FDA approval of aficamten, indicating approval in the second half of 2025 based on a September 26, 2025 PDUFA date [2]. - It is alleged that the company failed to disclose risks associated with not submitting a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), which could delay the regulatory process [2]. - During an earnings call on May 6, 2025, it was revealed that the company had discussions with the FDA about safety monitoring but chose to submit the NDA without a REMS, misleading investors about the regulatory timeline [2]. Group 2: Investor Information - Investors who suffered losses in Cytokinetics during the relevant period have until November 17, 2025, to request to be appointed as lead plaintiff, although participation does not require serving in this role [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees [3]. Group 3: Legal Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky has a history of securing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and is recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against KBR, Inc. alleging securities fraud that affected investors between May 6, 2025, and June 19, 2025 [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that KBR, Inc. made false statements regarding its partnership with HomeSafe, despite knowing that the U.S. Department of Defense had concerns about HomeSafe's ability to fulfill a global household goods contract [2]. - It is alleged that the defendants' statements about KBR's business operations and prospects were materially false and misleading, lacking a reasonable basis during the relevant time [2]. Group 2: Next Steps for Investors - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until November 18, 2025, to request to be appointed as lead plaintiff, although participation in any recovery does not require serving as a lead plaintiff [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees [3]. Group 3: Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a history of securing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and is recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States [4].

Core Viewpoint - A lawsuit has been filed against MoonLake Immunotherapeutics and its senior executives for potential violations of federal securities laws, following disappointing results from its Phase 3 clinical trials for sonelokimab [1][2][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, under the case name Peters v. MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, et al., No. 1:25-cv-08612 [2]. - Investors have until December 15, 2025, to request to be appointed to lead the case [2]. Group 2: Company Background - MoonLake Immunotherapeutics is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing therapies for inflammatory diseases [3]. - The company conducted Phase 3 VELA trials for sonelokimab, aimed at treating moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa [3]. Group 3: Clinical Data and Allegations - MoonLake claimed that its "strong clinical data" from the Phase 2 MIRA trial indicated higher clinical responses and differentiation from competitors [4]. - Allegations suggest that the clinical data and Nanobody structure did not provide a superior clinical benefit, raising doubts about the drug's regulatory approval and commercial viability [5]. Group 4: Stock Performance - Following the announcement of disappointing results from the VELA Phase 3 trials on September 28, 2025, MoonLake's stock price plummeted nearly 90%, from $61.99 per share to $6.24 per share [6].