Accessibility StatementSkip Navigation NEW YORK, Sept. 29, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- The Gross Law Firm issues the following notice to shareholders of Semler Scientific, Inc. (NASDAQ: SMLR). Shareholders who purchased shares of SMLR during the class period listed are encouraged to contact the firm regarding possible lead plaintiff appointment. Appointment as lead plaintiff is not required to partake in any recovery. CONTACT US HERE: https://securitiesclasslaw.com/securities/semler-scientific-inc-loss-submission- ...

NEW YORK, Sept. 23, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Class Action Attorney Juan Monteverde with Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"), has recovered millions of dollars for shareholders and is recognized as a Top 50 Firm in the 2024 ISS Securities Class Action Services Report. The firm is headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City and is investigating Premier, Inc. (NASDAQ: PINC) related to its sale to an affiliate of Patient Square Capital. Under the terms of the proposed trans ...

Core Viewpoint - The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is shifting its policy to allow corporations to require shareholders to resolve legal claims through arbitration, which is intended to reduce legal expenses for companies and potentially enhance the attractiveness of Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) [1][4]. Summary by Sections Corporate Benefits - The new policy enables companies to insert mandatory arbitration clauses in registration statements, which can help them avoid costly legal battles and negative publicity [2][4]. - This policy marks a reversal from the SEC's previous stance, which had deterred companies from including arbitration clauses in their registration statements since the early 2010s [4][5]. Shareholder Implications - Shareholders may face significant disadvantages as forced arbitration could prevent them from participating in class-action lawsuits, which are essential for holding companies accountable for securities fraud [3][4]. - The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) highlighted that class-action securities settlements totaled approximately $3.7 billion in 2024, contrasting sharply with only $345 million returned to investors through SEC enforcement during the same period [3]. Regulatory Context - The SEC's new position acknowledges current Supreme Court precedent, indicating that the agency will no longer consider arbitration clauses as a factor in approving stock sales to the public [6]. - The SEC's previous concerns regarding the compatibility of 1930s securities laws with the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 have been resolved, allowing for this policy shift [5][6].

Core Viewpoint - The Gross Law Firm has issued a notice to shareholders of PubMatic, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit due to alleged misleading statements and omissions that affected the company's stock value during a specified period [1][3]. Group 1: Class Action Details - The class period for the lawsuit is from February 27, 2025, to August 11, 2025 [3]. - Allegations include that a major demand side platform buyer shifted clients to a new platform, leading to reduced ad spend and revenue for PubMatic [3]. - The lawsuit claims that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements about the company's business and prospects, lacking a reasonable basis [3]. Group 2: Shareholder Actions - Shareholders are encouraged to register for the class action by the deadline of October 20, 2025, to potentially be appointed as lead plaintiffs [4]. - Once registered, shareholders will receive updates through a portfolio monitoring software regarding the case's progress [4]. - Participation in the case incurs no cost or obligation for the shareholders [4]. Group 3: Law Firm Background - The Gross Law Firm is a nationally recognized class action law firm focused on protecting investors' rights against deceit and fraud [5]. - The firm aims to ensure companies adhere to responsible business practices and seeks recovery for investors who suffered losses due to misleading statements [5].

Core Points - The SEC has announced a significant policy change allowing public companies to prohibit shareholders from initiating class action lawsuits, opting for arbitration instead [1] - SEC Chairman Paul Atkins emphasized the intention to reduce compliance burdens for companies and support new listings and small businesses [1] - This move is seen as a shift towards a pro-business stance, reversing the stricter enforcement agenda of the previous administration [1] Group 1: Policy Changes - The SEC will no longer block IPOs based on companies' prohibitions on shareholder class action lawsuits [1] - The new policy aims to facilitate easier access to additional funding for companies post-IPO [1] - The SEC's approach is perceived as a response to the competitive landscape among states for corporate registrations, particularly with Delaware facing competition from Texas and Nevada [1] Group 2: Reactions and Concerns - Democratic lawmakers and investor rights organizations have expressed concerns that limiting shareholder litigation rights could pose risks to investors and the market [1][2] - Critics argue that this change may reduce market transparency and tilt the power balance in favor of corporations, potentially undermining investor confidence [1] - Statistics indicate that class action settlements have historically provided greater compensation to shareholders compared to SEC enforcement actions, raising concerns about the implications of forced arbitration [2]

Core Viewpoint - Recent regulatory actions against financial fraud in the stock market have intensified, with several companies facing significant penalties, indicating a stronger stance from authorities against such practices [1][3]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - On September 12, multiple listed companies received fines from regulatory authorities for financial fraud, with penalties reaching over 200 million yuan for some, and even former delisted companies being penalized [1][3]. - This year alone, more than ten companies have been punished by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) for financial fraud, a number that surpasses previous years [3]. - The penalties have escalated from previous fines of a few hundred thousand to over a billion yuan, demonstrating a serious commitment to tackling financial misconduct [3]. Group 2: Enforcement Mechanisms - Regulatory authorities are employing advanced technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence to detect financial discrepancies, making it harder for companies to conceal fraudulent activities [5][6]. - The CSRC encourages public reporting of financial fraud, which enhances the ability to uncover hidden misconduct [6]. Group 3: Implications for Companies - Companies that have been delisted are still subject to penalties for past fraudulent activities, signaling that delisting does not exempt them from accountability [7][9]. - The regulatory environment is shifting, with local governments now cooperating with regulatory bodies to ensure a clean market, recognizing that financial fraud harms ordinary investors and the overall market integrity [11]. Group 4: Investor Protection - The regulatory framework is evolving to provide better protection for investors, with efforts to facilitate collective lawsuits for compensation against fraudulent companies [11][13]. - The ongoing crackdown on financial fraud is seen as a positive development for ordinary investors, as it aims to create a more trustworthy market environment [13].

Core Viewpoint - Semler Scientific, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit due to allegations of issuing materially false and misleading statements regarding a Department of Justice investigation into violations of the False Claims Act during the class period from March 10, 2021, to April 15, 2025 [3][4]. Group 1 - The class action lawsuit is based on allegations that Semler Scientific failed to disclose a material investigation by the United States Department of Justice, which is related to potential violations of the False Claims Act [3]. - The lawsuit claims that the defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading throughout the relevant time period [3]. - Shareholders who purchased shares of Semler Scientific during the specified class period are encouraged to register for participation in the class action [4]. Group 2 - The deadline for shareholders to seek lead plaintiff status in the class action is October 28, 2025 [4]. - Once registered, shareholders will be enrolled in a portfolio monitoring software to receive updates on the case [4]. - The Gross Law Firm, which is handling the case, is a nationally recognized class action law firm dedicated to protecting investors' rights [5].

Group 1 - Over 300 employees of South Korean companies have returned to South Korea after being detained by the U.S. for 8 days, reuniting with their families [1] - The detention center where the South Korean employees were held had poor living conditions, with around 80 people per room, making basic needs like eating and using the restroom difficult [1] - A lawyer representing the detained employees revealed that U.S. personnel threatened workers with prolonged detention unless they signed voluntary departure agreements [1] Group 2 - On the same day that the South Korean employees were released, the U.S. began to challenge South Korea on tariff issues [1]

Core Viewpoint - Semler Scientific, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit due to allegations of issuing materially false and misleading statements regarding a material investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice related to the False Claims Act [2][4]. Group 1: Allegations and Class Period - The class period for the lawsuit is defined as March 10, 2021, to April 15, 2025 [2]. - Allegations include failure to disclose a material investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice and discussing potential violations of the False Claims Act in hypothetical terms [2]. Group 2: Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders who purchased shares during the specified class period are encouraged to register for the class action, with a deadline of October 28, 2025, to seek lead plaintiff status [3]. - Registered shareholders will be enrolled in a portfolio monitoring software to receive updates on the case [3]. Group 3: Law Firm's Commitment - The Gross Law Firm aims to protect investors' rights and ensure companies adhere to responsible business practices [4]. - The firm seeks recovery for investors who suffered losses due to false or misleading statements that led to artificial inflation of the company's stock [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Capricor Therapeutics, Inc. for allegedly providing misleading information regarding its lead drug candidate, deramiocel, during the class period from October 9, 2024, to July 10, 2025 [2][4]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit is on behalf of all individuals and entities who purchased Capricor securities during the specified class period [2]. - Investors have until September 15, 2025, to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit [2]. Group 2: Allegations Against Capricor - The complaint alleges that Capricor provided materially misleading information about deramiocel's potential to obtain a Biologics License Application (BLA) from the FDA while concealing adverse facts regarding its safety and efficacy data from the Phase 2 HOPE-2 trial [4]. - On July 11, 2025, Capricor announced it received a Complete Response Letter (CRL) from the FDA, denying the BLA due to insufficient evidence of effectiveness and the need for additional clinical data [5]. Group 3: Stock Price Impact - Following the announcement of the CRL, Capricor's stock price fell from $11.40 per share on July 10, 2025, to $7.64 per share on July 11, 2025, reflecting a significant decline [6].