Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against CarMax, Inc. alleging securities fraud that affected investors between June 20, 2025, and November 5, 2025 [1][2] Group 1: Allegations - The lawsuit claims that defendants made false statements regarding CarMax's growth prospects, suggesting that earlier growth was a temporary benefit due to customer speculation about tariffs [2] - It is alleged that the statements made by defendants about CarMax's business operations and prospects were materially false and misleading, lacking a reasonable basis [2] Group 2: Legal Process - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until January 2, 2026, 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, with no obligation to participate [3] Group 3: Law 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]

FCX SHAREHOLDERS: Freeport-McMoRan Inc. Investors with Losses may have been Misled by the Company and are Urged to Contact BFA Law by January 12December 01, 2025 3:18 PM EST | Source: Bleichmar Fonti & AuldNew York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - December 1, 2025) - Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (NYSE: FCX) and certain of the Company's senior executives for securities fraud after significan ...

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Synopsys, Inc. for securities fraud, following a significant drop in stock price attributed to potential violations of federal securities laws [1][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, titled Kim v. Synopsys, Inc., et al., No. 3:25-cv-09410 [3]. - Investors have until December 30, 2025, to request to be appointed to lead the case [3]. Group 2: Company Performance - Synopsys provides design automation software products, with its Design IP segment being the fastest-growing, increasing from 25% of revenue in 2022 to 31% in 2024 [4]. - The company reported Q3 2025 results showing a revenue decline in the Design IP segment to $425.9 million, a 7.7% decrease year-over-year, and a net income of $242.5 million, down 43% year-over-year [6]. Group 3: Market Reaction - Following the Q3 2025 results announcement, Synopsys stock fell nearly 36%, from $604.37 per share to $387.78 per share [6]. - The decline was attributed to revelations that Design IP customers required more customization, impacting the business model and economics of the segment [5][6].

MLTX SHAREHOLDERS: MoonLake Immunotherapeutics Investors with Losses may have been Misled by the Company and are Urged to Contact BFA Law by December 15December 01, 2025 3:18 PM EST | Source: Bleichmar Fonti & AuldNew York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - December 1, 2025) - Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a lawsuit has been filed against MoonLake Immunotherapeutics (NASDAQ: MLTX) and certain of the Company's senior executives for potential violations of the f ...

Core Viewpoint - CarMax, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit for securities fraud following a significant drop in stock price attributed to misleading statements regarding demand and financial performance [2][4][5]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - A class action lawsuit has been filed against CarMax and its senior executives for securities fraud, with claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [4]. - Investors have until January 2, 2026, to request to lead the case, which is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland [4]. - The lawsuit alleges that CarMax misled investors about the sustainability of demand for its vehicles, particularly in light of U.S. tariffs that temporarily boosted sales [5]. Group 2: Financial Performance - CarMax reported disappointing financial results for Q2 of fiscal year 2026, including a 5.4% decline in retail used unit sales, a 6.3% decline in comparable store used unit sales, and a 2.2% decline in wholesale units [7]. - The company's net income for Q2 was approximately $95.4 million, down from $132.8 million in the previous year [7]. - The decline in sales was attributed to a "pull forward" in demand due to the announcement of tariffs, which led to a significant stock price drop of $11.45 per share, or roughly 20% [8]. Group 3: Executive Changes - The unexpected departure of CEO Bill Nash on November 6, 2025, has raised concerns about the company's management and its assessment of car loan portfolios [6]. - Following the announcement of Nash's departure and a weak preliminary Q3 outlook, CarMax's stock dropped over 24% [8].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Stride, Inc. for securities fraud, alleging that the company misled investors about its business performance, leading to significant stock price drops [1][3]. Company Overview - Stride, Inc. is an education technology company that provides an online platform to students across the U.S. [4]. Allegations of Fraud - The lawsuit claims that Stride inflated enrollment numbers by retaining "ghost students," failed to comply with employee background checks and licensure laws, and provided a poor customer experience that resulted in higher withdrawal rates and lower conversion rates [4][5]. Stock Price Impact - Following the allegations, Stride's stock dropped by $18.60 per share (over 11%) from $158.36 on September 12, 2025, to $139.76 on September 15, 2025 [5]. - On October 28, 2025, Stride admitted to issues with customer experience, leading to an estimated 10,000-15,000 fewer enrollments, which caused the stock to plummet by $83.48 per share (over 54%) from $153.53 to $70.05 on October 29, 2025 [6]. Legal Proceedings - Investors have until January 12, 2026, to request to be appointed to lead the case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia [3]. - The lawsuit is filed under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [3]. Investor Actions - Investors in Stride are encouraged to seek legal options and submit their information to the law firm handling the case [2][7].

The lawsuit, Laborers' District Council & Contractors' Pension Fund of Ohio v. James Hardie Industries plc., et al., 25-cv-13018 (N.D. Ill.), filed on behalf of all investors who purchased or acquired James Hardie common stock—which converted from American Depositary Shares on July 1, 2025—between May 20, 2025, and August 18, 2025 (the "Class Period"), seeks damages for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5. Accessibility StatementSkip Navigation SAN FR ...

Accessibility StatementSkip Navigation LRN Investors with Losses Urged to Contact the Firm SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 1, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Investor rights law firm Hagens Berman reminds investors of the January 12, 2026, deadline to move the Court for appointment as lead plaintiff in the securities fraud class action lawsuit filed against Stride, Inc. (NYSE: LRN). The lawsuit alleges that Stride, one of the nation's largest providers of online educational services, misled investors about its operational health ...

Core Viewpoint - Telix Pharmaceuticals Ltd. is facing a securities class action lawsuit due to regulatory setbacks and significant stock declines over the summer of 2025 [1] Summary by Sections Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit, titled Thomas v. Telix Pharmaceuticals Ltd., aims to represent investors who acquired the company's securities between February 21, 2025, and August 28, 2025 [3] - The complaint alleges that the company and its executives made false and misleading statements about the business, inflating the company's valuation before the truth was revealed [3] Core Allegations - The lawsuit claims that Telix violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by failing to disclose: - Overstated therapeutic progress regarding prostate cancer therapeutic candidates TLX591 and TLX592 [4] - Misrepresentation of the stability, quality, and regulatory compliance of its third-party supply chain and manufacturing partners [5] Regulatory Events Impacting Stock - Two key events led to a significant decline in Telix's American Depositary Shares (ADSs): - **SEC Subpoena (July 22, 2025)**: The company disclosed receiving a subpoena from the SEC, leading to a stock price drop of over 13% in two trading sessions [6] - **FDA Rejection (August 28, 2025)**: Telix received a Complete Response Letter from the FDA for TLX250-CDx, resulting in a further decline of more than 21% in two trading sessions [7][8] Class Action and Investigation - The class action litigation is filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, seeking damages for investors who suffered losses due to the alleged securities fraud [10] - Hagens Berman is investigating the claims, focusing on discrepancies between the company's assurances and the regulatory revelations [11]

Core Viewpoint - Grabar Law Office is investigating claims on behalf of shareholders of Unicycive Therapeutics, Inc. regarding potential breaches of fiduciary duties by certain officers and directors of the company [1]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The investigation focuses on whether certain officers and directors of Unicycive Therapeutics breached their fiduciary duties to the company [1]. - Shareholders who purchased Unicycive shares prior to March 29, 2024, and still hold them can seek corporate reforms and the return of funds to the company at no cost [2][4]. Group 2: Allegations of Misconduct - A federal securities fraud class action complaint alleges that Unicycive's officers made false statements regarding the company's readiness to meet FDA manufacturing compliance requirements and overstated the regulatory prospects of the oxylanthanum carbonate new drug application [3]. - The public statements made by the defendants were claimed to be materially false and misleading at all relevant times [3].