Core Viewpoint - Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is investigating potential claims against Napco Security Technologies, Inc. due to a class action complaint alleging breaches of fiduciary duties by the board of directors [1] Group 1: Company Performance and Misleading Statements - Napco Security Technologies made false and misleading statements regarding its growth projections based on customer demand for hardware products [2] - The company reported a reduction in sales for hardware products in its second quarter financial results on February 3, 2025, despite previous optimism [2] - The sales shortfall was attributed to reduced sales from two of the company's larger distributors, leading to a retraction of the long-term EBITDA margin target of 45% [2] Group 2: Legal Investigation and Shareholder Rights - The class action complaint has a Class Period from February 5, 2024, to February 3, 2025, during which the company's public statements were deemed materially misleading [2] - Long-term stockholders of Napco are encouraged to contact Bragar Eagel & Squire for more information regarding their rights and the ongoing investigation [3]

Core Points - The Company is convening an extraordinary shareholders' meeting on July 2, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. CET, with an option for remote participation via video conference [2][3] - The agenda includes a proposal to amend the articles of association to allow shareholders holding at least 5% of outstanding shares for three years to nominate directors [5][6] - Shareholders must register by June 18, 2025, and notify the Company of their intention to participate by June 26, 2025 [13][14] Meeting Details - The meeting will be held at the Company's seat, with video conference facilities for remote attendees [2][3] - Attendance registration will begin at 1:45 p.m. CET on the day of the meeting [4] - Voting can be conducted by mail or by proxy, with specific forms required for these processes [17][18] Voting and Participation - Each share entitles the holder to one vote, and decisions require a 75% majority for certain agenda items [28][29] - Shareholders wishing to ask questions must submit them by June 26, 2025, and answers will be provided during the meeting [24] - Documentation related to the meeting is available on the Company's website and can be requested via email [25]

Core Viewpoint - Besra Gold Inc. has issued a statement addressing misleading claims made by Quantum Metal Recovery Inc., emphasizing that Quantum's actions could harm shareholder value and that Besra's independent directors are exploring legal options to counter these misrepresentations [1][2]. Group 1: Misrepresentations and Legal Actions - Quantum has allegedly made material misrepresentations regarding Besra's operations and the status of the Bau Gold Project, which is not yet a producing mine [3][4]. - The lawsuit initiated by Quantum claims that Besra's board has acted oppressively towards Quantum's interests, despite Quantum's nominees having significant representation on the board [4][6]. - Besra's independent directors are concerned about Quantum's attempts to remove them, which they believe could lead to irreversible damage to shareholder value [1][2]. Group 2: Financial Obligations and Project Delays - Quantum has failed to remit funds under the gold purchase agreement (GPA), with a payment of approximately US$9.83 million due in December 2023 not received, leading to legal action from other shareholders [9]. - The renewal of Besra's mining tenements has been delayed, impacting the development of the Bau Gold Project, although renewals were initiated in 2024 [9][10]. Group 3: Governance and Shareholder Meeting - The upcoming special meeting of shareholders is scheduled for June 24, 2025, where critical decisions regarding board composition and governance will be made [2][22]. - Besra's independent directors are urging shareholders to vote against Quantum's nominees and to support the removal of Dato' Lim Khong Soon from the board [21][27]. Group 4: Quantum's Compliance Issues - Quantum has been accused of disregarding corporate and securities laws, including failing to comply with insider reporting obligations despite owning approximately 29.88% of Besra's voting securities [14][16]. - The Securities Commission of Malaysia has previously directed Quantum to cease offering its securities to the public due to legal violations [14].

SAN DIEGO, June 11, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Shareholder rights law firm Johnson Fistel, PLLP announces that a class action lawsuit has commenced on behalf of investors of Fortrea Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: FTRE). The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Fo ...

Core Viewpoint - Archer-Daniels-Midland Company (ADM) is facing a class action lawsuit alleging breaches of fiduciary duties by its board of directors, particularly concerning the performance and prospects of its Nutrition segment [1][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The class action complaint was filed on January 24, 2024, covering a Class Period from April 30, 2020, to January 22, 2024 [1]. - The lawsuit claims that ADM has spent billions over the past decade to expand its Nutrition business to mitigate commodity price volatility in its traditional agricultural commodities trading [2]. Group 2: Allegations Against ADM - Defendants are accused of making false and misleading statements regarding the Nutrition segment's performance and accounting practices [3]. - Positive statements were made about the Nutrition segment being a future profit driver, capitalizing on healthier eating trends and rising consumer demand for natural ingredients [3]. - There was an implication that the growth of the Nutrition segment would enhance diversification and earnings stability for ADM [3].

Core Viewpoint - Johnson Fistel, PLLP is investigating claims against SentinelOne, Inc. regarding alleged misconduct by its officers and directors, which may impact shareholders who have held shares since June 1, 2022 [1][2]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The investigation focuses on claims that SentinelOne's officers and directors made false or misleading statements and failed to disclose significant issues, including ineffective internal controls over accounting and financial reporting [2]. - Allegations include that SentinelOne's Annualized Recurring Revenue (ARR) was overstated, leading to inflated guidance from the company [2]. Group 2: Legal Context - A class action complaint has already been filed against SentinelOne, indicating ongoing legal challenges for the company [2]. - Shareholders may have the opportunity to hold the company's officers and directors personally responsible for the alleged harm [2]. Group 3: Law Firm Background - Johnson Fistel, PLLP is a nationally recognized law firm specializing in shareholder rights and securities class action lawsuits, with multiple offices across the United States [3]. - The firm has a strong track record, having recovered approximately $90,725,000 for clients in cases where it served as lead or co-lead counsel [4].

Core Viewpoint - Johnson Fistel, PLLP is investigating potential breaches of fiduciary duties by directors and officers of Quantum Computing Inc. (QCI), focusing on their obligations to shareholders [1]. Group 1: Legal Investigation - A class action complaint has been filed against QCI, alleging that the defendants made false and misleading statements regarding the company's quantum computing technologies and relationships with NASA [3]. - The complaint claims that QCI overstated its technological capabilities, the nature of its contracts with NASA, and its progress in developing a TFLN foundry [3]. - It is alleged that QCI's revenues were partially based on undisclosed related party transactions, which could significantly harm the company's business and reputation once revealed [3]. Group 2: Shareholder Rights - Current long-term QCI shareholders may have legal claims that can be brought against the company's directors and officers [2]. - Shareholders interested in discussing their legal rights are encouraged to contact the lead analyst at Johnson Fistel [2].

Core Viewpoint - Johnson Fistel, PLLP has initiated an investigation into potential breaches of fiduciary duties by the board members of Blueprint Medicines Corporation in relation to its proposed sale to Sanofi [1] Group 1: Acquisition Details - Blueprint Medicines has entered into a definitive agreement with Sanofi to sell all outstanding shares for $129.00 per share in cash, along with a non-tradeable contingent value right that could yield two milestone payments of $2 and $4 for future development and regulatory achievements related to BLU-808 [2] - The transaction agreement includes a provision that restricts Blueprint's ability to solicit or accept superior proposals, imposing a significant termination fee if the board pursues a competing bid [3] Group 2: Market Analysis - A Wall Street analyst has set a price target of $167 per share for Blueprint's common stock, which is significantly higher than the agreed transaction price of $129.00 [3]

Core Viewpoint - Glenbrook Capital Management urges Tejon Ranch Co.'s Board to implement a shareholder proposal allowing shareholders with 10% ownership to call a special meeting, highlighting significant shareholder support and questioning the timing of a recent $200 million shelf offering [1][2][4]. Group 1: Shareholder Proposal - Glenbrook emphasizes that over 49% of shareholders supported the Special Meeting Proposal at the Annual Meeting, despite Tejon spending over $3 million to oppose it [2][3]. - The proposal's failure was attributed to the stock awarded to Board members, indicating a disconnect between the Board's interests and those of public shareholders [3]. Group 2: Board Conduct and Shareholder Relations - Glenbrook criticizes the current Board's lack of transparency and hostility, contrasting it with the hope for a more open approach from independent directors [2]. - The election of Andrew Dakos at the Annual Meeting is seen as a sign of shareholder discontent with the Board's actions [2]. Group 3: Concerns Over Recent Offering - The $200 million shelf offering filed shortly after the Annual Meeting raises concerns about potential dilution of public shareholders, especially given Tejon's history of insider purchases in rights offerings [4]. - Glenbrook questions whether this offering is an attempt to alter shareholder dynamics before the next Annual Meeting, given the timing and lack of prior notice to shareholders [4].

Core Viewpoint - Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is investigating potential claims against BioAge Labs, Inc. due to a class action complaint related to the company's IPO and alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by its board of directors [1] Group 1: Legal Investigation - A class action complaint was filed against BioAge on January 7, 2024, concerning its registration statement for the IPO held on September 26, 2024 [1] - The investigation focuses on whether BioAge's board of directors has breached their fiduciary duties to the company [1] Group 2: Product and Market Impact - On December 6, 2024, BioAge announced the discontinuation of the STRIDES Phase 2 trial for its lead product candidate, azelaprag, due to safety concerns related to elevated liver transaminase levels [2] - This announcement was unexpected, as BioAge had previously highlighted azelaprag's potential in patients undergoing obesity therapy with incretin drugs during its IPO [2] Group 3: Stock Price Reaction - Following the announcement regarding the discontinuation of the trial, BioAge's stock price fell significantly from $20.09 per share on December 6, 2024, to $4.65 per share on December 7, 2024 [3]