New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - February 19, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, continues to investigate potential securities claims on behalf of shareholders of GSI Technology Inc. (NASDAQ: GSIT) resulting from allegations that GSI Technology may have issued materially misleading business information to the investing public.SO WHAT: If you purchased GSI Technology securities you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a ...

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding investors who purchased Ramaco Resources, Inc. securities during the specified Class Period of the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline for a class action lawsuit [1]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who bought Ramaco securities between July 31, 2025, and October 23, 2025, may be eligible for 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 March 31, 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: Legal Representation - Rosen Law Firm emphasizes the importance of selecting qualified legal counsel with a proven track record in securities class actions, highlighting their own success in this area [4]. - The firm has achieved significant settlements for investors, including over $438 million in 2019 alone, and has been recognized for its performance in securities class action settlements [4]. Group 3: Case Allegations - The lawsuit alleges that during the Class Period, Ramaco made materially false and misleading statements regarding its mining activities at the Brook Mine, claiming that no significant work had commenced despite positive public statements [5]. - The misleading information led to an overstatement of development progress, resulting in investor damages when the truth was revealed [5].

Group 1: Ramaco Resources, Inc. (NASDAQ:METC) - A class action has been initiated on behalf of stockholders of Ramaco Resources, Inc. with a class period from July 31, 2025, to October 23, 2025, and a lead plaintiff deadline of March 31, 2026 [7] - The complaint alleges that the company made materially false and misleading statements regarding its Brook Mine operations, including the failure to commence significant mining activity and overstating development progress [7] - Following a report by Wolfpack Research, which claimed the Brook Mine was a "hoax" and showed no active work, Ramaco's stock price fell by $3.81, or 9.6%, closing at $36.01 per share on October 23, 2025 [7] Group 2: Beyond Meat, Inc. (NASDAQ:BYND) - A class action has been initiated on behalf of stockholders of Beyond Meat, Inc. with a class period from February 27, 2025, to November 11, 2025, and a lead plaintiff deadline of March 24, 2026 [7] - The lawsuit alleges that the company issued false and misleading statements regarding its long-lived assets, indicating that their book value exceeded fair value, which could lead to a material, non-cash impairment charge [7] - Additionally, the allegations suggest that these issues could impair Beyond Meat's ability to timely file periodic reports with the SEC [7]

Core Insights - Class actions have been initiated for stockholders of Bath & Body Works, Inc. and BellRing Brands, Inc., with deadlines for lead plaintiff petitions approaching [1] Bath & Body Works, Inc. (NYSE:BBWI) - Class period for the lawsuit is from June 4, 2024, to November 19, 2025, with a lead plaintiff deadline of March 16, 2026 [2] - Allegations include failure to disclose that the company's strategy of "adjacencies, collaborations and promotions" did not grow the customer base or deliver the expected net sales growth [2] - On November 20, 2025, the company reported a 1% year-over-year revenue decline, missing guidance of 1-3% growth, and a 26% drop in net income to $77 million [3] - The company revised its full-year guidance for net sales and earnings per diluted share down from $3.28 to "at least $2.83" [3] - Following the disappointing results, the stock price fell by $5.22, or 24.8%, closing at $15.82 per share [4] BellRing Brands, Inc. (NYSE:BRBR) - Class period for the lawsuit is from November 19, 2024, to August 4, 2025, with a lead plaintiff deadline of March 23, 2026 [5] - Allegations state that the company did not disclose that strong sales results were due to customers accumulating excess inventory rather than increased consumer demand [5] - On August 4, 2025, BellRing reported a narrowed fiscal year 2025 outlook for net sales between $2.28 billion and $2.32 billion, leading to a stock price decline of $17.46, or nearly 33%, from $53.64 to $36.18 per share [5]

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is investigating potential securities claims on behalf of shareholders of America's Car-Mart, Inc. due to allegations of materially misleading business information issued to the investing public [1]. Group 1: Legal Action and Investor Rights - Shareholders who purchased America's Car-Mart securities may be entitled to compensation through a class action lawsuit without any out-of-pocket fees, facilitated by a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - The Rosen Law Firm is preparing a class action to seek recovery of investor losses related to America's Car-Mart [2]. Group 2: Company Performance and Market Reaction - On September 4, 2025, America's Car-Mart reported a first-quarter loss of $0.69 per share, compared to a net loss of $0.15 per share in the same period the previous year, leading to an 18.2% drop in stock price on that day [3].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against PomDoctor, Ltd. for allegedly making materially false and misleading statements during the class period from October 9, 2025, to December 11, 2025, affecting investors who purchased American Depositary Receipts [1][2] Group 1: Allegations - The complaint alleges that PomDoctor was involved in a fraudulent stock promotion scheme that utilized social media misinformation and impersonated financial professionals [6] - It is claimed that insiders and/or affiliates used offshore or nominee accounts to facilitate the coordinated dumping of shares during a price inflation campaign [6] - The company's public statements and risk disclosures reportedly omitted any mention of false rumors and artificial trading activity that influenced the stock price, rendering their statements about business operations and prospects materially false and misleading [6] Group 2: Legal Process - Investors have until April 6, 2026, to seek appointments as lead plaintiff in the class action lawsuit [1][2] - The law firm Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, with over 125 years of experience in securities litigation, is leading the case and encourages affected investors to come forward [4]

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm has announced a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of securities of Ramaco Resources, Inc. for the period between July 31, 2025, and October 23, 2025, due to alleged misleading statements regarding the company's mining activities [1][5]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that during the Class Period, Ramaco made materially false and misleading statements, including that significant mining activity had not commenced at the Brook Mine and that no active work was taking place, leading to an overstatement of development progress [5]. - Investors are entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement if they purchased Ramaco securities during the Class Period [2]. Group 2: Participation Information - Interested parties can join the class action by visiting the provided link or contacting Phillip Kim, Esq. for more information [3][6]. - A lead plaintiff must move the Court by March 31, 2026, to represent other class members in the litigation [1][3]. Group 3: Rosen Law Firm's Credentials - Rosen Law Firm has a strong track record in securities class actions, having achieved the largest securities class action settlement against a Chinese company and being ranked No. 1 for the number of settlements in 2017 [4]. - The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors, including over $438 million in 2019 alone [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Coupang, Inc. for allegedly misleading investors about its cybersecurity measures, leading to significant financial losses following a major data breach affecting over 33 million customers [1][2][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit is on behalf of investors who acquired Coupang securities between May 7, 2025, and December 16, 2025 [1]. - Investors have until February 17, 2026, to seek appointment as lead plaintiff representatives [2]. - The complaint claims that Coupang's inadequate cybersecurity safeguards heightened the risk of a data breach [2]. Group 2: Cybersecurity Incident - In November 2025, disclosures revealed a data breach that compromised sensitive personal information of more than 33 million customers [3]. - Following the breach, Coupang's stock price experienced significant declines, with the company acknowledging the cybersecurity event on December 16, 2025 [3]. - This incident is noted as the largest cybersecurity event in South Korea's history [3].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Richtech Robotics Inc. for allegedly making false and misleading statements regarding a commercial relationship with Microsoft, impacting investor perceptions and decisions [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The class period for the lawsuit is from January 27, 2026, to January 29, 2026, with a deadline for lead plaintiff appointments set for April 3, 2026 [2]. - The complaint alleges that Richtech's public statements were false and materially misleading, creating a false impression of a commercial relationship with Microsoft [2]. Group 2: Investor Participation - Shareholders who purchased shares during the class period are encouraged to contact the law firm for potential lead plaintiff appointments, although this is not required to participate in any recovery [2][3]. - The law firm emphasizes that participation in the lawsuit may help shareholders recover losses incurred due to the alleged misleading statements [5]. Group 3: Law Firm Profile - DJS Law Group specializes in securities class actions, corporate governance litigation, and M&A appraisals, focusing on enhancing investor returns through advocacy [4]. - The firm represents some of the largest hedge funds and alternative asset managers, indicating a strong reputation in the industry [4].

Group 1 - The Hong Kong IPO market in 2025 led the global capital markets with 114 companies raising approximately HKD 121.16 billion in listing fees, a year-on-year increase of HKD 64.62 billion, with listing fees accounting for about 4.24% of the total fundraising amount [1] - The top four IPO sponsors in 2025 were all Chinese firms, with CICC leading by sponsoring 41 companies, followed by CITIC Securities with 32, Huatai International with 22, and China Merchants International tied with Morgan Stanley at fourth place [2][3] - The participation of Chinese brokers in IPO sponsorship was significantly higher than that of foreign institutions, with only Morgan Stanley being the sole foreign firm in the top five [2][3] Group 2 - In 2025, 27 brokers acted as stabilizing agents for IPOs, with CICC leading by stabilizing 30 IPOs, followed by CITIC Securities with 16, and Morgan Stanley with 9 [4] - A total of 140 brokers participated as underwriters in the Hong Kong IPO market, with Futu Securities involved in 54 IPOs, followed closely by Agricultural Bank of China International with 53 [4] - The "Big Four" accounting firms dominated the auditing market for IPOs, collectively participating in 87% of the projects, with Ernst & Young leading by auditing 41 IPOs [5][6] Group 3 - In 2025, 34 mainland law firms provided legal services for Hong Kong IPOs, with Jingtian Gongcheng leading with 47 projects, doubling its participation from the previous year [7] - A total of 122 overseas law firms were involved in providing legal services for IPOs, with the top three being King & Wood Mallesons, DLA Piper, and Clyde & Co [9] - Eight industry consultants participated in 113 IPOs, with Frost & Sullivan being the most active, involved in 82 projects, capturing a market share of 73% [9]