Market Newsdesk

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Plug Power Inc. (NASDAQ: PLUG) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after significant stock drops resulting from the potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in Plug Power, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/plug-power-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until April 3, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in Plug Power securities. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York and is captioned Ortolani v. Plug Power Inc., et al., No. 1:26-cv-00165.

Why is Plug Power Being Sued for Securities Fraud?

Plug Power provides hydrogen fuel cell turnkey solutions for the electric mobility and stationary power markets and develops infrastructure such as hydrogen production plants. During the relevant period, Plug Power announced it had “closed a $1.66 billion loan guarantee” from the U.S. Dept. of Energy’s Loan Program Office to “help finance the construction of up to six projects to produce and liquefy zero- or low-carbon hydrogen at scale throughout the United States.”

As alleged, in truth, Plug Power materially overstated the likelihood that DOE loan funds would ultimately become available to Plug Power, and that Plug Power would ultimately construct the hydrogen production facilities necessary to receive those funds.

Why did Plug Power’s Stock Drop?

On October 7, 2025, Plug Power announced the abrupt departure of its CEO, Andrew Marsh, and its President, Sanjay Shrestha. This news caused the price of Plug Power stock to drop $0.26 per share, or 6.3%, from a closing price of $4.13 per share on October 6, 2025, to $3.87 per share on October 7, 2025.

A month later, on November 10, 2025, Plug Power announced that it “suspended activities under the DOE loan program,” which purportedly allowed the Company to “redeploy capital” to pursue an agreement with a U.S. data center developer to monetize electricity rights. This news caused the price of Plug Power stock to drop $0.09 per share, or 3.4%, from a closing price of $2.65 per share on November 7, 2025, to $2.56 per share on November 10, 2025, the next trading day.

Then, on November 13, 2025, The Washington Examiner reported that Plug Power “confirmed . . . that it suspended activities” on “its plans to construct six facilities to produce and liquefy zero or low-carbon hydrogen, putting at risk” the $1.66 billion DOE loan it closed in January. This news caused the price of Plug Power stock to drop $0.48 per share, or 17.6%, from a closing price of $2.49 per share on November 13, 2025, to $2.25 per share on November 14, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/plug-power-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in Plug Power, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis, there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/plug-power-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/plug-power-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Kyndryl Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:KD) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after significant stock drops resulting from the potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in Kyndryl, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/kyndryl-holdings-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until April 13, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in Kyndryl securities. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York and is captioned Brander v. Kyndryl Holdings, Inc., et al., No. 1:26-cv-00782.

Why is Kyndryl Being Sued for Securities Fraud?

Kyndryl is a provider of enterprise technology services offering advisory, implementation, and managed service capabilities to customers in more than 60 countries. Kyndryl is the world’s largest IT infrastructure services provider.

As alleged, Kyndryl misrepresented its cash management practices, including the drivers of its adjusted free cash flow metric, and the efficacy of Kyndryl’s internal controls over financial reporting, for FY2025 and the first three quarters of FY2026.

Why did Kyndryl’s Stock Drop?

On February 9, 2026, Kyndryl announced that it would delay the release of its fiscal Q3 2026 financial statement pending an accounting review into its cash management practices and related disclosures, including regarding the drivers of the Company’s adjusted free cash flow metric, and certain other matters following document requests from the SEC. Kyndryl also announced the immediate departures of its CFO and General Counsel.

On this news, the price of Kyndryl stock dropped over 52% during the course of trading on February 9, 2026.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/kyndryl-holdings-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in Kyndryl, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis, there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information for the Kyndryl ($KD) Class Action by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/kyndryl-holdings-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/kyndryl-holdings-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against CoreWeave, Inc. (NASDAQ:CRWV) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after significant stock drops resulting from the potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in CoreWeave, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until March 13, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in CoreWeave securities. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey and is captioned Masaitis v. CoreWeave, Inc., et al., No. 2:26-cv-00355.

Why is CoreWeave Being Sued For Securities Fraud?

CoreWeave is an AI-focused cloud computing company that builds and operates data centers offering high-performance GPU infrastructure. CoreWeave relies on multiple partners to develop its data centers and provide the infrastructure needed for its AI computing operations, including Core Scientific, a large digital infrastructure company. On July 7, 2025, CoreWeave announced a merger agreement with Core Scientific.

During the relevant period, CoreWeave repeatedly assured investors it could capitalize on the “robust” and “unprecedented” demand for its services given its “competitive strengths,” including its ability to “deploy” AI infrastructure “at massive scale” and “rapidly scale our operations.”

As alleged, in truth, CoreWeave overstated its ability to meet customer demand and concealed significant construction delays at its data centers.

Why did CoreWeave’s Stock Drop?

On October 30, 2025, Core Scientific announced it did not receive enough shareholder votes to approve the merger with CoreWeave and, as a result, terminated the merger agreement. This news caused the price of CoreWeave stock to drop $8.87 per share, or more than 6%, from $139.93 per share on October 29, 2025, to $131.06 per share on October 30, 2025.

Then, on November 10, 2025, CoreWeave lowered guidance for revenue, operating income, capital spending, and active power capacity for 2025 due to “temporary delays related to a third-party data center developer who is behind schedule.” This news caused the price of CoreWeave stock to drop $17.22 per share, or more than 16%, from $105.61 per share on November 10, 2025, to $88.39 per share on November 11, 2025.

Finally, on December 15, 2025, The Wall Street Journal reported that the “completion date” for a “huge data-center cluster” in Denton, Texas to be leased by OpenAI, “has been pushed back several months,” and that the site builder, Core Scientific, had flagged delays at the site months earlier. The Wall Street Journal also reported that Core Scientific had flagged additional delays at sites in Texas and elsewhere “since at least February.” This news caused the price of CoreWeave stock to drop $2.85 per share, or more than 3%, from $72.35 per share on December 15, 2025, to $69.50 per share on December 16, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in CoreWeave, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis, there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit against Ardent Health, Inc. (NYSE:ARDT) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after a significant stock drop resulting from potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in Ardent Health, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until March 9, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in Ardent Health securities. The class action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. It is captioned Postiwala v. Ardent Health, Inc., et al., No. 3:26-cv-00022.

Why is Ardent Health Being Sued for Securities Fraud?

Ardent Health and its affiliates operate acute care hospitals and other healthcare facilities. A critical aspect of Ardent Health’s operations is the collection of accounts receivable and the framework by which Ardent Health determines the collectability of such accounts. According to the lawsuit, Ardent Health stated that it employed an active monitoring process to determine the collectability of its accounts receivable, and that this process included “detailed reviews of historical collections” as a “primary source of information.” 

As alleged, in truth, Ardent Health did not primarily rely on “detailed reviews of historical collections” in determining collectability of accounts receivable, but instead “utilized a 180-day cliff at which time an account became fully reserved.” This allowed Ardent Health to report higher amounts of accounts receivable during the Class Period, and delay recognizing losses on uncollectable accounts. The lawsuit alleges that Ardent Health’s purported misrepresentations are a violation of the federal securities laws.

Why did Ardent Health’s Stock Drop?

On November 12, 2025, after market hours, Ardent Health revealed it had completed “hindsight evaluations of historical collection trends” that resulted in a $43 million decrease in revenue for the quarter. Ardent Health also revealed that it increased its professional liability reserves by $54 million because of “adverse prior period claim developments” resulting from a set of claims between 2019 and 2022 “as well as consideration of broader industry trends.”

This news caused the price of Ardent Health stock to drop $4.75 per share, or more than 33%, from a closing price of $14.05 per share on November 12, 2025, to $9.30 per share on November 13, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in Ardent Health, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis; there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Fermi Inc. (NASDAQ:FRMI), certain of the Company’s senior executives and directors, and underwriters of Fermi’s Initial Public Offering after a significant stock drop resulting from potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in Fermi, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/fermi-inc-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until March 6, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts securities fraud claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in Fermi securities, as well as claims under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 on behalf of investors who purchased or acquired Fermi common stock pursuant and traceable to the Company’s Initial Public Offering. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and is captioned Lupia v. Fermi Inc., et al., No. 1:26-cv-00050.

Why is Fermi Being Sued for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws?

Fermi is an energy and AI infrastructure company that purportedly intends to build multiple, large scale nuclear reactors to support its own network of large, grid-independent data centers powered by nuclear and other energy to power AI companies. Fermi’s first project is Project Matador, its flagship, first-of-its kind energy and AI infrastructure campus designed to provide dedicated power for AI workloads.

Fermi completed its IPO in October 2025. In the IPO Registration Statement, Fermi represented that it “entered into a letter of intent . . . with an investment grade-rated tenant (the ‘First Tenant’) to lease a portion of the Project Matador Site . . . for an initial lease term of twenty years.” The Company also represented there was strong demand for Project Matador and that construction of the facility would be funded by “tenant payments” and “lease agreements.” Following the IPO, Fermi announced that the First Tenant entered into an Advance in Aid of Construction Agreement, through which it would advance up to $150 million to Fermi to fund Project Matador construction costs.

As alleged, in truth, Fermi overstated tenant demand for Project Matador and misrepresented the agreement with the First Tenant.

Why did Fermi’s Stock Drop?

On December 12, 2025, Fermi disclosed that “[o]n December 11, 2025, the First Tenant notified the Company that it is terminating the [Advance of Aid of Construction Agreement]” after “[t]he exclusivity period set forward in the letter of intent expired.” Fermi also stated that it had “commenced discussions with several other potential tenants” and “continue[s] to negotiate the terms of a lease agreement at Project Matador” with the First Tenant. This news caused the price of Fermi stock to drop $5.16 per share, or more than 33%, from a closing price of $15.25 per share on December 11, 2025, to $10.09 per share on December 12, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/fermi-inc-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in Fermi, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis; there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/fermi-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/fermi-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit against BellRing Brands, Inc. (NYSE:BRBR) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after a significant stock drop resulting from potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in BellRing, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases-investigations/bellring-brands-inc-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until March 23, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in BellRing securities. The class action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. It is captioned Denha v. BellRing Brands, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-00575.

Why is BellRing Being Sued for Securities Fraud?

BellRing develops, markets, and sells “convenient nutrition” products such as ready-to-drink (“RTD”) protein shakes primarily under the brand name Premier Protein. During the relevant period, Defendants represented that sales growth reflected increased end-consumer demand, attributing results to “organic growth,” “distribution gains,” “incremental promotional activity,” and “[s]trong macro tailwinds around protein” among other factors. At the same time, Defendants downplayed the impact of competition on demand, insisting BellRing was not experiencing any significant changes in competition, and that in the RTD category particularly, BellRing possessed a “competitive moat,” given that “the ready-to-drink category is just highly complex” and the products are “hard to formulate.”

As alleged, in truth, BellRing’s reported sales during the Class Period were driven by its key customers stockpiling inventory and did not reflect increased end-consumer demand or brand momentum. Following the destocking, BellRing admitted that competitive pressures were materially weakening demand.

Why did BellRing’s Stock Drop?

On May 6, 2025, BellRing’s CFO revealed “several key retailers lowered their weeks of supply on hand, which is expected to be a mid-single-digit headwind to our third quarter growth,” adding “[w]e now expect Q3 sales growth of low single digits.” BellRing’s CEO further revealed that retailers had been “hoarding inventory to make sure they didn’t run out of stock on shelf” and “protecting themselves coming out of capacity constraints,” but since there had been “several quarters of high in-stock rates,” customers “felt comfortable about bringing [inventory] down. We thought this could happen.”

This news caused the price of BellRing stock to drop $14.88 per share, or 19%, from a closing price of $78.43 per share on May 5, 2025, to $63.55 per share on May 6, 2025.

On August 4, 2025, after market hours, BellRing reported its 3Q 2025 financial results and “narrowed its fiscal year 2025 outlook for net sales.” Then, during the Company’s August 5, 2025 earnings call, BellRing’s CEO attributed the narrowed guidance to “several other competitors” gaining space to sell their products with a large retailer and that “it is not surprising to see new protein RTDs enter[ed]” the convenient nutrition market.

This news caused the price of BellRing stock to drop $17.46 per share, or nearly 33%, from a closing price of $53.64 per share on August 4, 2025, to $36.18 per share on August 5, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases-investigations/bellring-brands-inc-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in BellRing, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis; there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases-investigations/bellring-brands-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases-investigations/bellring-brands-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against NuScale Power Corporation (NYSE:SMR) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after a significant stock drop resulting from the potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in NuScale, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/nuscale-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until April 20, 2026 to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in NuScale Class A common stock. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon and is captioned Truedson v. NuScale Power Corporation, et al., No. 3:26-cv-00328.

Why is NuScale Being Sued for Securities Fraud?

NuScale is a nuclear technology company. Its core technology is the NuScale Power Module (“NPM”), a small modular nuclear reactor (“SMR”) designed to generate energy within a broader power plant. Prior to the start of the Class Period, NuScale established a partnership with ENTRA1 Energy LLC. Under this agreement, ENTRA1 was responsible for constructing power generation facilities incorporating NuScale’s NPMs and managing the financing, development, and initial operations of the facilities utilizing the NPMs.

NuScale allegedly touted ENTRA1’s purported wide-ranging capabilities and deep experience developing power plants. According to NuScale, ENTRA1 is an “independent power plant development platform,” “led by an executive team of energy, infrastructure, and finance sector veterans,” with the type of experience that is “exactly what is required” to commercialize and deploy NuScale’s NPMs.

As alleged, in truth, ENTRA1 had never built, financed, or operated any significant project, let alone a project in the complex field of nuclear power generation. Moreover, in contrast to NuScale’s representations, ENTRA1 had been organized primarily to support the work of one individual, its principal Wadie Habboush, an investor and entrepreneur.

Why did NuScale’s Stock Drop?

On November 6, 2025, NuScale disclosed that its general and administrative expenses had increased from $17 million in the prior year period, to $519 million during 3Q 2025, due largely to NuScale’s payment of $495 million to ENTRA1 for its services. Also on November 6, 2025, under pressure from investment analysts, NuScale acknowledged that ENTRA1 did not have any significant experience building nuclear power projects and admitted that ENTRA1 would not actually be “out there building the power plants” but would serve “to coordinate projects, to bring in partners, to get deals and the partners they bring in that can execute.”

Following this news, analysts with Guggenheim Securities, LLC published a report stating that ENTRA1 is a “3-year old company that has never built, financed or operated anything” and had just “3 employees and 1 investor,” and stated a “more accurate description of ENTRA1 would be that it is an entity supporting the activities of a single individual, specifically Mr. Habboush.” This news caused the price of NuScale stock to drop $4.03 per share over two trading days, or more than 12.4%, from a closing price of $32.46 per share on November 6, 2025, to $28.43 per share on November 10, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/nuscale-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in NuScale, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis; there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/nuscale-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/nuscale-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces an investigation into Mister Car Wash, Inc.’s (NASDAQ: MCW) board of directors and its controlling stockholder, LGP, for potential breaches of their fiduciary duties to shareholders in connection with a potential take-private sale of Mister Car Wash that would cash out every public stockholder for $7 per share.

If you are a current shareholder of Mister Car Wash, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/mister-car-wash-investigation.

Why is Mister Car Wash being Investigated?

On February 18, 2026, Mister Car Wash announced that it had agreed to be acquired by Leonard Green & Partners, L.P. (“LGP”) for $7.00 per share. This price may represent an unfairly low price being paid to Mister Car Wash’s stockholders and may be the result of conflicts of interest between Mister Car Wash’s board of directors and LGP.

LGP is the largest owner of Mister Car Wash stock, owning over 66% of the company’s common stock. As Mister Car Wash noted in its most recent annual report (SEC Form 10-K) “[f]or as long as LGP owns more than 50% of [Mister Car Wash’s] common stock it will be able to exert a controlling influence over all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the nomination and election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions, such as a merger or other sale of our Company or its assets.” As the controlling stockholder of Mister Car Wash, LGP owes fiduciary duties to the public stockholders of Mister Car Wash.

LGP has already used its shares to give stockholder approval to the take-private sale, and the company does not plan to solicit any further votes from public stockholders. With the ability to approve the sale of Mister Car Wash to itself, needing only its own votes, LGP is incentivized to execute the deal as cheaply as possible.

BFA Law is investigating Mister Car Wash’s board of directors and LGP to ascertain whether they have breached fiduciary duties to Mister Car Wash’s stockholders in connection with the contemplated transaction.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/mister-car-wash-investigation

What Can You Do?

If you are a current holder of Mister Car Wash stock you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis, there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/mister-car-wash-investigation

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/mister-car-wash-investigation

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

Abivax Presents First Evidence of Anti-Fibrotic Activity for Obefazimod Alongside New Clinical Efficacy and Safety Analyses in Inflammatory Bowel Disease at ECCO 2026

• 22 abstracts presented at European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization’s (ECCO) 21
  
  ^st
  
  Annual Congress illustrate the depth and breadth of data supporting obefazimod’s potential in inflammatory bowel disease
• Anti-fibrotic effects of obefazimod were observed in both a preclinical human fibroblast model and in an in vivo animal model, suggesting potential to address a major unmet need in Crohn’s disease
• A pooled analysis of safety data from ABTECT-1 and ABTECT-2 induction trials demonstrates a favorable safety profile with rates of serious treatment emergent adverse events and study discontinuation similar to placebo
• Symptomatic response of obefazimod was observed as early as week 1 (first time point evaluated) with symptomatic remission observed at week 2 (nominally significant p-value <0.05) in a pooled analysis of ABTECT-1 and ABTECT-2
• Biomarker data from ABTECT-1 and ABTECT-2 induction trials indicate upregulation of miR-124 and reduction of key inflammatory cytokines (IL-17A and IL-6) toward homeostatic levels

PARIS, France – February 21, 2026 – 12:00 PM CET – Abivax SA (Euronext Paris: FR0012333284 – ABVX / Nasdaq: ABVX) (“Abivax” or the “Company”), a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing therapeutics that harness the body’s natural regulatory mechanisms to stabilize the immune response in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases, today announced novel preclinical and clinical data for obefazimod as part of the presentations at The European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization’s (ECCO) 21st Annual Congress. These data further expand the evidence base supporting development of obefazimod for inflammatory bowel disease, highlighting its anti-fibrotic potential in Crohn’s disease (CD), a favorable safety and tolerability profile, rapid onset of symptomatic relief, and additional evidence supporting its mechanism of action in restoring immune balance through upregulation of miR-124.

Marc de Garidel, MBA, Chief Executive Officer of Abivax, commented:
“The robust data presented at ECCO this week reinforce obefazimod’s unique and differentiated profile. The anti-fibrotic findings, taken together with the additional clinical efficacy, safety, and biomarker data presented, strengthen our confidence in obefazimod’s potential across UC and CD. As we look toward the upcoming Phase 3 maintenance trial readout in Q2 2026 and the Phase 2b ENHANCE-CD trial readout in Q4 2026, we remain focused on translating this data into real-world benefits for patients with IBD.”

Fabio Cataldi, MD, Chief Medical Officer of Abivax, added:
“The emerging preclinical evidence of anti-fibrotic activity is particularly compelling, as fibrosis remains an area of profound unmet need. Combined with the favorable safety and tolerability profile of obefazimod, we believe this growing evidence base positions obefazimod as a compelling oral therapy with the potential to address multiple dimensions of disease not yet fully managed by current therapies.”

HIGHLIGHTED PRESENTATIONS:

The 22 abstracts presented at ECCO 2026, including subgroup analyses from the Phase 3 ABTECT induction trials illustrating obefazimod’s clinical activity across a wide range of patient subpopulations, can be accessed at: https://www.abivax.com/publications/congress-publications

• Obefazimod shows first evidence of anti-fibrotic activity in preclinical models of inflammatory bowel disease (Danese S et al. OP30, ECCO 2026)
  • In an in vitro human fibroblast model, obefazimod led to a ~50% reduction in a biomarker of active fibrosis (Pro-C3) (p < 0.0001) and a ~30% reduction in a fibroblast activation marker (⍺SMA) (p < 0.0001)
  • In an in vivo animal model, obefazimod exhibited dual anti-inflammatory and anti-fibrotic effects leading to rapid improvement in markers of disease activity
    • Obefazimod demonstrated anti-inflammatory effects when initiated as a fibrosis preventative (day 5) or fibrosis treatment (day 20):
      • ~25% (p<0.0001) and ~50% (p<0.0001) reduction in Disease Activity Index, with late (day 20) and early (day 5) treatment, respectively
      • ~35% (p<0.0001) and ~65% (p<0.0001) reduction in histologic ulceration and inflammation scores, with late and early treatment, respectively
    • Obefazimod demonstrated anti-fibrotic effects when initiated as a fibrosis preventative (day 5) or fibrosis treatment (day 20):
      • ~45% (p<0.0001) and ~55% (p<0.0001) reduction in Collagen Deposition (fibrosis marker), with late and early treatment, respectively
      • ~40% (p<0.0001) and ~50% (p<0.0001) reduction in ⍺SMA (fibroblast activation marker), with late and early treatment, respectively

• ~60% (p<0.0001) and ~90% (p<0.0001) reduction in histologic Fibrosis Score, with late and early treatment, respectively

• Integrated summary of safety of obefazimod in Phase 3 ABTECT induction trials (Seidler U et al. P0712, ECCO 2026)
  • Of the 1,272 patients randomized and treated with Obe-50mg, Obe-25mg, or placebo (PBO), the overall rates of serious treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was comparable across all groups (Obe-50mg: 3.1%; Obe-25mg: 2.2%; PBO: 3.2%)
  • TEAEs leading to study discontinuation occurred at similar rates across all groups (Obe-50mg, 4.7%; Obe-25mg, 1.9%; PBO, 4.1%)
  • Headaches were one of the most frequent TEAEs and were reported to be mild, transient, and short in duration (median: 2-3 days) and rarely leading to discontinuation (0-1.1%)
• Early symptomatic improvements with obefazimod in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Armuzzi A et al. P0923, ECCO 2026)
  • A greater proportion of patients receiving obefazimod (50mg or 25mg) versus PBO achieved symptomatic response from week 1 and symptomatic remission from week 2 increasing through week 8
  • In a pooled analysis of the Phase 3 ABTECT-1 and ABTECT-2 induction trials, both Obe-50mg and Obe-25mg produced reductions in rectal bleeding subscores and stool frequency subscores versus PBO starting from week 1 and reaching a nominally significant difference by week 2 (p-value <0.05)
  • Improvement in symptoms consistently increased through week 8

• Obefazimod enhances miR-124 expression in blood and colon tissue and reduces the key inflammatory cytokines IL-17A and IL-6 in serum of patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Siegmund B et al. P0868, ECCO 2026)
  • In both Phase 3 ABTECT induction trials, Obe-25mg and Obe-50mg significantly enhanced expression of miR-124 in blood (unadjusted p < 0.0001 vs. PBO) and in rectal and sigmoidal tissue (unadjusted p < 0.0001 vs. PBO) at week 8
  • At week 8, Obe-25mg and Obe-50mg significantly reduced IL-17A levels in serum (unadjusted p < 0.0001 vs. PBO); Obe-25mg (p=0.0150 vs. PBO) and Obe-50mg (p=0.0039 vs. PBO) decreased IL-6 levels in serum
  • miR-124 mechanism of action allows for partial reduction of inflammatory cytokines IL-17 and IL-6 toward homeostatic levels without completely blocking these pathways

Professor Silvio Danese, Director of the Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit of the IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, added:
“For patients living with inflammatory bowel disease, long-term disease control and preservation of bowel function are critical. Seeing data that address not only clinical response and safety, but also biological activity and fibrosis, is encouraging. If these findings continue to translate clinically, they may represent a meaningful advancement for patients who currently have limited options.”

About Abivax

Abivax is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing therapeutics that harness the body’s natural regulatory mechanisms to stabilize the immune response in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases. Based in France and the United States, Abivax’s lead drug candidate, obefazimod (ABX464), is in Phase 3 clinical trials for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis.

Contact:

Patrick Malloy
SVP, Investor Relations
Abivax SA
[email protected]
+1 847 987 4878

Media Contacts:

LifeSci Communications
Jon Pappas
SVP, Head of Media Relations
[email protected]

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This press release contains forward-looking statements, forecasts and estimates, including those relating to the Company’s business. Words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “potential” and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements include statements concerning the potential therapeutic benefit of obefazimod and the expected availability and timing of results from the Phase 3 maintenance trial and Phase 2b ENHANCE-CD trial of obefazimod. Although Abivax’s management believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, investors are cautioned that forward-looking information and statements are subject to various risks, contingencies and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond the control of Abivax, that could cause actual results and developments to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, the forward-looking information and statements. A description of these risks, contingencies and uncertainties can be found in the documents filed by the Company with the French Autorité des Marchés Financiers pursuant to its legal obligations including its universal registration document (Document d’Enregistrement Universel) and in its Annual Report on Form 20-F filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on March 24, 2025 under the caption “Risk Factors.” These risks, contingencies and uncertainties include, among other things, the uncertainties inherent in research and development, future clinical data and analysis, decisions by regulatory authorities, such as the FDA or the EMA, regarding whether and when to approve any drug candidate, as well as their decisions regarding labelling and other matters that could affect the availability or commercial potential of such product candidates, and the availability of funding sufficient for the Company’s foreseeable and unforeseeable operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements. Special consideration should be given to the potential hurdles of clinical and pharmaceutical development, including further assessment by the Company and regulatory agencies and IRBs/ethics committees following the assessment of preclinical, pharmacokinetic, carcinogenicity, toxicity, CMC and clinical data. Furthermore, these forward-looking statements, forecasts and estimates are made only as of the date of this press release. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Abivax disclaims any obligation to update these forward-looking statements, forecasts or estimates to reflect any subsequent changes that the Company becomes aware of, except as required by law. Information about pharmaceutical products (including products currently in development) that is included in this press release is not intended to constitute an advertisement. This press release is for information purposes only, and the information contained herein does not constitute either an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to purchase or subscribe for securities of the Company in any jurisdiction. Similarly, it does not give and should not be treated as giving investment advice. It has no connection with the investment objectives, financial situation or specific needs of any recipient. It should not be regarded by recipients as a substitute for exercise of their own judgment. All opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice. The distribution of this document may be restricted by law in certain jurisdictions. Persons into whose possession this document comes are required to inform themselves about and to observe any such restrictions.

Attachment

• 20260221_Abivax_PR_Presents New Data at ECCO 2026