Market Newsdesk

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP notifies investors in Microvast Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: MVST) that a class action has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased securities between April 1, 2025 and March 16, 2026. Find out if you could qualify to recover your per-share losses.

MVST shares declined $0.79 per share, or 34.2%, to close at $1.52 on March 17, 2026, after Microvast reported Q4 revenue of $96.5 million versus a $136.4 million consensus estimate, gross margin of 1.0%, and a $32.5 million ESS inventory impairment. The last day to move for lead plaintiff is September 21, 2026.

The Alleged Promise: Higher Margins and 2025 Capacity

The lawsuit maintains that Microvast presented investors with a growth story built around a 2025 revenue outlook of $450 million to $475 million, a gross margin target initially set at 30%, and the Huzhou Phase 3.2 expansion expected to support additional production capacity before year-end 2025.

Plaintiffs assert that the Company later raised its gross margin outlook to a range of 32% to 35%, allegedly reinforcing the impression that product mix, efficiency gains, and capacity expansion remained on track.

The Alleged Reality: Delays, Impairment, and a Margin Collapse

The complaint contends that investors were not fully informed that customer rollout delays, inventory management issues, and specialized ESS components manufactured for a customer without related 2025 revenue allegedly undermined the margin story. The action further alleges that Huzhou Phase 3.2 did not meet the previously stated Q4 2025 production timing.

“Companies that make specific promises to investors about future performance have an obligation to disclose known risks to those projections. Here, the complaint alleges that Microvast’s margin and production-capacity assurances were contradicted by later reported results, including a $32.5 million impairment and a 1.0% quarterly gross margin.” said Joseph E. Levi, Esq., managing partner of Levi & Korsinsky, LLP.

Promise vs. Actual: By the Numbers

• Microvast guided investors to 2025 revenue of $450 million to $475 million while later reporting Q4 2025 revenue of $96.5 million.
• Consensus expectations for Q4 revenue were $136.4 million, allegedly magnifying the market impact of the reported shortfall.
• Gross margin guidance moved from 30% to 32%, then to a 32% to 35% range, before Q4 gross margin was reported at 1.0%.
• The Company attributed part of the margin decline to a $32.5 million inventory impairment tied to specialized ESS components.
• Huzhou Phase 3.2 was repeatedly described as targeted for Q4 2025 qualified production, while later disclosures pointed to production beginning in 2026.

What the Lawsuit Alleges About the Gap

The lawsuit maintains that the gap between Microvast’s public expectations and reported results caused investors to purchase MVST shares at allegedly inflated prices. When the Company reported the revenue miss, ESS inventory impairment, and margin decline, the market allegedly repriced MVST shares, resulting in substantial investor losses.

Submit your information here or call (212) 363-7500.

ABOUT LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP — Over the past 20 years, Levi & Korsinsky has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. The firm has extensive expertise in complex securities litigation and a team of over 70 employees. For seven consecutive years, Levi & Korsinsky has ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services’ Top 50 Report. Investors who suffered losses have until September 21, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.

Frequently Asked Questions About the MVST Lawsuit

Q: What is the MVST class action lawsuit about? A: A securities class action has been filed against Microvast Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: MVST) alleging materially false and misleading statements between April 1, 2025 and March 16, 2026. Shares fell approximately 34.2% after the Company reported Q4 2025 revenue of $96.5 million, gross margin of 1.0%, and a $32.5 million ESS inventory impairment. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.

Q: Who is eligible to join the MVST investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased MVST stock or securities between April 1, 2025 and March 16, 2026 and suffered financial losses may be eligible. Eligibility is based on purchase date and documented losses, not on whether you still hold the shares.

Q: What specific misstatements does the MVST lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Microvast made materially false or misleading statements regarding its ability to achieve high gross margin targets, complete the Huzhou Phase 3.2 expansion by the end of 2025, and manage inventory and customer rollout risks during the Class Period. When later financial and operational results were disclosed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What court was the MVST class action filed in? A: The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Being appointed does not increase individual recovery but gives direct oversight of how the case is run.

Q: What documents do I need to provide for a review? A: Brokerage statements or trade confirmations showing purchase dates, share quantities, prices paid, and any subsequent sale dates and prices.

Q: What if I already sold my MVST shares, can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: Do I need to go to court or give testimony? A: No. The overwhelming majority of class members never appear in court or give depositions. If there is a settlement or recovery, eligible class members generally submit a claim form to seek their portion.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10004
[email protected]
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP notifies investors in Cogent Communications Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: CCOI) that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased securities between February 29, 2024 and May 1, 2026. Find out if you could qualify to recover your losses. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

CCOI shares allegedly lost more than 80%, or approximately $69.00 per share, after Class Period disclosures concerning the alleged failure of Cogent’s wavelength backlog to convert. Applications to serve as lead plaintiff must be filed by September 21, 2026.

The Alleged Optical Wavelength Backlog Securities Fraud Issue

According to the lawsuit, Cogent repeatedly described strong demand for optical wavelength services after acquiring the former Sprint wireline business. The complaint alleges that those statements gave investors the impression that thousands of wavelength opportunities represented meaningful future revenue.

The lawsuit contends that the backlog was largely illusory because up to 90% of the cited orders were allegedly expected to fail or never become paying customers.

Key Backlog Allegations for Shareholders

• Cogent allegedly cited a growing wavelength backlog that reached approximately 2,700 unique wavelengths.
• The complaint alleges that many orders depended on network reconfiguration work that was not yet complete.
• Customers allegedly faced long provisioning windows that impaired conversion of the backlog into revenue.
• The lawsuit contends that investors were not adequately informed that a substantial portion of the backlog was unlikely to materialize.
• The alleged backlog problem was central to Cogent’s growth story for the acquired wireline assets.

How the Alleged Backlog Issue Affected Cogent’s Turnaround Story

Cogent’s wavelength business was allegedly presented as a key driver of the Company’s post-acquisition plan. As alleged, the market valued Cogent in part on expectations that wavelength demand would help transform an acquired, declining wireline network into a growth platform.

“This case presents important questions about backlog disclosure obligations in the telecommunications sector, particularly where alleged order volume was central to the Company’s growth narrative. Investors should be able to evaluate whether reported demand reflected realistic revenue opportunity or material risks that were not fully disclosed.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Submit your information here or call (212) 363-7500.

WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY: Over the past 20 years, Levi & Korsinsky LLP has established itself as a nationally-recognized securities litigation firm that has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders and built a track record of winning high-stakes cases. The firm has extensive expertise representing investors in complex securities litigation and a team of over 70 employees to serve our clients. For seven years in a row, Levi & Korsinsky has ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services’ Top 50 Report as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States.

Frequently Asked Questions About the CCOI Lawsuit

Q: What is the CCOI class action lawsuit about? A: A securities class action has been filed against Cogent Communications Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: CCOI) alleging materially false and misleading statements between February 29, 2024 and May 1, 2026. The case focuses on alleged misrepresentations concerning demand for Cogent’s optical wavelength business and the reliability of its backlog.

Q: Who may be eligible in the CCOI investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased CCOI stock or securities between February 29, 2024 and May 1, 2026 and suffered financial losses may be eligible. Eligibility is based on purchase date and documented losses, not on whether you still hold the shares.

Q: What specific misstatements does the CCOI lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Cogent made materially false or misleading statements regarding demand for optical wavelength services, the size and quality of the backlog, and the likelihood that those orders would convert into revenue. The lawsuit alleges that up to 90% of the backlog was ultimately lost.

Q: When did Cogent allegedly mislead investors? A: The Class Period runs from February 29, 2024 to May 1, 2026. The complaint alleges that statements during this period overstated the strength and reliability of wavelength demand.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses and help oversee how the case is litigated.

Q: What documents do I need to submit my information? A: Brokerage statements or trade confirmations showing purchase dates, share quantities, prices paid, and any subsequent sale dates and prices.

Q: What if I already sold my CCOI shares, can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: Do I need to go to court or give testimony? A: No. The overwhelming majority of class members never appear in court or give depositions. If there is a settlement or recovery, eligible class members generally submit a claim form to seek their portion.

CONTACT:

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Ed Korsinsky, Esq.

33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor

New York, NY 10004

[email protected]

Tel: (212) 363-7500

Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP reminds purchasers of Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: HTZ) securities that a class action has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased shares between May 7, 2026 and June 23, 2026. Find out if you might qualify for recovery or call (212) 363-7500.

Hertz shares declined more than 40% to close at $3.00 on June 24, 2026. Investors have until September 22, 2026 to seek lead plaintiff status.

Alleged Fleet Management Vehicle Rental Securities Failures

Hertz’s rental model depends heavily on buying vehicles, holding them efficiently, and reselling them at values that support profitability. The filing states that Hertz presented its “Back-to-Basics” plan as a disciplined fleet strategy built around “Buy Right, Hold Right, Sell Right,” while allegedly failing to disclose that used-vehicle volatility was pressuring residual values and depreciation.

The operational issue at the center of this release is Net Depreciation per Unit per Month, or DPU. As set forth in the complaint, Hertz reported first-quarter Net DPU of $312 and described that figure as approaching its sub-$300 “North Star” target, supported by disciplined fleet rotation.

Alleged DPU Impact by the Numbers

• Hertz reported first-quarter 2026 Net DPU of $312.
• The Company described the sub-$300 DPU level as a “North Star” target.
• Hertz reported $2.0 billion in first-quarter revenue, up 11% year over year.
• The complaint claims the used-car market softness was not merely transitory or isolated.
• Hertz later guided second-quarter Adjusted Corporate EBITDA to only $50 million to $80 million.

What the Lawsuit Claims About Residual Values

The lawsuit contends that Hertz’s fleet economics were more vulnerable than represented because vehicle resale values were being affected by renewed used-car market weakness. As alleged, those pressures made the Company’s liquidity and EBITDA outlook materially less secure than investors had been led to believe.

On June 24, 2026, Hertz announced $300 million of Exchangeable Senior First-Lien Secured PIK Notes due 2030, a concurrent share-lending offering of more than 37 million shares, and “unexpected softness in the used car market.” The action claims that this announcement corrected prior alleged statements about fleet discipline, depreciation, and operating performance.

“The complaint raises serious questions about whether investors received accurate information about Hertz’s fleet economics before shares declined more than 40%. In a vehicle rental business, depreciation and residual values are not side issues; they are central to the investment case.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Submit your information now or call (212) 363-7500.

WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY — Ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services’ Top 50 Report for seven consecutive years, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is a nationally recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation. With a team of over 70 professionals, the firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. Investors who suffered losses have until September 22, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.

Frequently Asked Questions About the HTZ Lawsuit

Q: What is the HTZ class action lawsuit about? A: A securities class action has been filed against Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: HTZ) alleging materially false and misleading statements between May 7, 2026 and June 23, 2026. Shares fell more than 40% after the Company disclosed unexpected softness in the used-car market, reduced second-quarter Adjusted Corporate EBITDA guidance, and announced a dilutive financing. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.

Q: Who is eligible to join the HTZ investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased HTZ stock or securities between May 7, 2026 and June 23, 2026 and suffered financial losses may be eligible. Eligibility is based on purchase date and documented losses, not on whether you still hold the shares.

Q: What specific misstatements does the HTZ lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. made materially false or misleading statements regarding liquidity, used-car market softness, fleet depreciation, DPU performance, and the Company’s ability to fund operations without distressed financing. When Hertz disclosed unexpected used-car market softness, sharply lower EBITDA guidance, and a dilutive financing, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What court was the HTZ class action filed in? A: The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Ft. Myers Division, and is governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Being appointed does not increase individual recovery but gives direct oversight of how the case is run.

Q: What documents do I need to submit my information? A: Brokerage statements or trade confirmations showing purchase dates, share quantities, prices paid, and any subsequent sale dates and prices.

Q: What if I already sold my HTZ shares, can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost. Securities class actions are generally handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, and no out-of-pocket costs. Any attorneys’ fees and expenses awarded to class counsel are subject to court approval.

CONTACT:

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Ed Korsinsky, Esq.

33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor

New York, NY 10004

[email protected]

Tel: (212) 363-7500

Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

All dollar references are in U.S. dollars, unless noted otherwise. 

BROOKFIELD NEWS, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Brookfield Property Partners (“BPY” or the “Partnership”) announced that the Board of Directors has declared quarterly distributions on the Partnership’s Class A Nasdaq-listed BPYPP, BPYPO, BPYPN and BPYPM (TSX: BPYP.PR.A) preferred units of $0.40625 per unit, $0.3984375 per unit, $0.359375 per unit and $0.390625 per unit, respectively, payable on September 29, 2026, to holders of record at the close of business on September 1, 2026.

Brookfield Property Partners

Brookfield Property Partners is one of the world’s premier real estate companies. We own and operate iconic properties in the world’s major markets, and our global portfolio includes office, retail, multifamily, logistics, hospitality, single-family rentals, manufactured housing, student housing and self-storage.

Brookfield Property Partners is a subsidiary of Brookfield Corporation (NYSE: BN, TSX: BN). More information is available at www.brookfield.com.

Contact:

Keren Dubon 
Investor Relations
Tel.: (212) 618-3440
Email: [email protected]

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Rackspace Technology, Inc. (“Rackspace” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: RXT) on behalf of investors that purchased or otherwise acquired Rackspace securities between May 7, 2026 and July 8, 2026 (the “Class Period”).

CLICK HERE TO JOIN THE CASE

If you are an investor in Rackspace and have suffered losses, you may

CLICK HERE

to contact us. You may also contact Kaplan Fox by emailing

[email protected]

or by calling (646) 315-9003.

DEADLINE REMINDER: If you are a member of the proposed Class, you may move the court no later than September 28, 2026 to serve as a lead plaintiff for the purported class. If you have losses we encourage you to contact us to learn more about the lead plaintiff process. You need not seek to become a lead plaintiff in order to share in any possible recovery.

The complaint alleges, throughout the Class Period Defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose to investors “(1) the Company’s enterprise AI efforts would require Rackspace to significantly re-prioritize its capacity and capital away from the profitable Private Cloud segment; (2) that Rackspace’s Public Cloud revenue was declining as customers contracted directly with hyperscale cloud platforms; (3) that, as a result, Rackspace was likely to significantly reduce a material portion of its Public Cloud infrastructure resale business; (4) as a result, the Company’s fiscal year 2026 revenue would be significantly impacted; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.”

WHY CONTACT KAPLAN FOX?

Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP is a nationally recognized law firm focused on complex litigation, with offices in New York, Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New Jersey. Founded in 1956, the firm has spent more than 50 years prosecuting securities, antitrust, and consumer protection actions in federal and state courts nationwide, recovering more than $10 billion for clients and the classes it has represented.

Kaplan Fox is widely regarded as one of the nation’s premier plaintiffs’ securities litigation firms and has received recognition from Chambers and Partners, Benchmark Litigation, Super Lawyers, and Lawdragon. Serving as lead or co-lead counsel in many landmark cases, the firm has secured some of the largest recoveries in the history of securities litigation, including a $2.425 billion recovery on behalf of Bank of America shareholders in In re Bank of America—the largest recovery ever obtained for claims under Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act—$800 million recovered for the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System and other pension funds in ATRS v. Allianz Global Investors, and a $475 million settlement in In re Merrill Lynch.

For decades, Kaplan Fox has represented public pension funds, institutional investors, businesses, and individuals in high-stakes litigation. Through its successful advocacy and precedent-setting victories, the firm has helped shape important areas of securities and corporate law while advancing accountability and protecting investor interests.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

If you have any questions about this Notice, your rights, or your interests, please contact:

CONTACT:

Pamela A. Mayer
KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP
800 Third Avenue, 38th Floor
New York, New York 10022
(646) 315-9003
[email protected]

Laurence D. King
KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1501
Oakland, California 94612
(415) 772-4704
[email protected]

Contacting or submitting information to Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor an obligation on the part of Kaplan Fox to retain you as a client.

https://www.kaplanfox.com/case/rackspace-technology-inc-class-action-alert-learn-more-now/

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP notifies institutional investors in PROCEPT BioRobotics Corporation (NASDAQ: PRCT) that a securities class action has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased Procept common stock between February 28, 2024 and February 25, 2026. Request an institutional investor loss assessment or call Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at (212) 363-7500.

PRCT shares declined more than 75%, from approximately $100.00 during the Class Period to less than $25.00 after alleged corrective disclosures, representing more than $75.00 per share. The window to apply for lead plaintiff closes on September 22, 2026.

Institutional Investor Securities Recovery ERISA Considerations

The securities action alleges that Procept’s valuation depended heavily on recurring handpiece revenue and reported utilization of its installed AquaBeam Robotic Systems. For pension funds, retirement plans, foundations, and asset managers, the alleged decline may warrant a transaction-level review of purchases, sales, and retained holdings during the Class Period.

The pleading asserts that investors were not told that an extensive discount program allegedly encouraged customers to place bulk handpiece orders beyond underlying procedure demand. As claimed, this allegedly created excess field inventory that later required destocking and optimization efforts.

Fiduciary Obligations and PRCT Recovery Options

Institutional fiduciaries evaluating PRCT losses may consider:

• Whether plan or fund assets purchased PRCT common stock during the February 28, 2024 to February 25, 2026 Class Period.
• Whether purchases occurred at prices allegedly inflated by reported handpiece sales, utilization metrics, or recurring revenue assumptions.
• Whether transaction records show losses after PRCT declined from approximately $100.00 to less than $25.00.
• Whether the institution has governance procedures for monitoring securities class action recoveries.
• Whether serving as lead plaintiff would align with the institution’s fiduciary duties and loss profile.

Case Summary for Large Holders

The complaint alleges that Procept reported strong handpiece revenue while customer inventory was allegedly building in the field. It further claims that the Company later disclosed actual procedure data showing handpiece sales had exceeded procedures by 8% to 16% every quarter since the first quarter of 2023.

“Institutional investors play a critical role in securities class actions, particularly where alleged losses arise from recurring revenue metrics and operating data that the market closely followed. Here, fiduciaries may wish to evaluate whether PRCT purchases were affected by the alleged gap between reported handpiece demand and actual procedure activity.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Contact us to learn more about institutional recovery options or call (212) 363-7500.

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP | Top 50 Securities Firm | (212) 363-7500 | www.zlk.com | Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions About the PRCT Lawsuit

Q: When did PROCEPT BioRobotics Corporation allegedly mislead investors? A: The Class Period runs from February 28, 2024 to February 25, 2026. The complaint alleges that corrective disclosures revealed information regarding handpiece sales, procedure data, and field inventory that caused a significant stock decline.

Q: What court was the PRCT class action filed in? A: The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Q: Who are the defendants named in the PRCT lawsuit? A: The complaint names PROCEPT BioRobotics Corporation and individual defendants including senior executives who allegedly signed SEC filings, made public statements, or certified financial disclosures under Sarbanes-Oxley.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Being appointed does not increase individual recovery but gives direct oversight of how the case is run.

Q: What if I already sold my PRCT shares, can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to contact the firm. Securities class actions are generally handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, and no out-of-pocket costs. Any attorneys’ fees and expenses awarded to class counsel are subject to court approval.

Q: What if I live outside the United States? A: U.S. securities class actions generally cover purchases on U.S. exchanges regardless of the investor’s country of residence.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10004
[email protected]
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: REGN) of a pending securities class action. Class Period: August 1, 2025 through May 15, 2026. Check if you might be eligible to recover your investment losses. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

REGN shares declined from $731.77 on April 28, 2026 to $629.68 after the May 15, 2026 after-market disclosure, a $102.09 per-share decrease, or approximately 13.95%. The Court has set September 14, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

“Investors deserve transparency about material risks that could affect their investments, especially where a pivotal oncology trial is approaching a readout after a protocol change. The allegations here focus on whether shareholders received sufficient information regarding clinical differentiation risk before REGN shares declined.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Alleged Melanoma Trial Clinical Differentiation Representations

The lawsuit asserts that Regeneron and management presented the prolonged event accrual slowdown as consistent with favorable active-arm performance in the Phase III Fianlimab-Libtayo Study. As alleged, those statements allegedly minimized the risk that the active treatment arm was not separating meaningfully from standard therapies.

The action claims that investors were not adequately informed that the study’s ability to reach statistical significance was under pressure and that a last-minute protocol amendment would expand the patient pool for progression-free survival analysis.

Clinical Differentiation Biotechnology Securities Issues

• Management allegedly suggested that delayed event accrual could reflect durable responses in the active treatment arms.
• The complaint alleges the active treatment arm failed to achieve meaningful clinical differentiation over standard therapies.
• Regeneron later disclosed that the PFS analysis would consider all enrolled patients with at least six months of follow-up.
• The May 15, 2026 announcement stated that the Phase 3 Trial of Fianlimab did not reach statistical significance for improvement in PFS.
• Plaintiffs contend the protocol amendment and failed primary endpoint undermined prior positive representations about the study’s risk profile.

Why Differentiation Adequacy Allegedly Mattered to Investors

Fianlimab-Libtayo was positioned as a potentially important first-line advanced melanoma program. As alleged, investors relied on Regeneron’s representations concerning the potential for the Fianlimab-Libtayo combination to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvement over pembrolizumab and other standards of care.

The action claims the market reacted sharply when information concerning the Phase III study’s protocol changes and subsequent failure to meet the primary PFS endpoint.

Learn more about the case or call (212) 363-7500.

WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY — Ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services’ Top 50 Report for seven consecutive years, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is a nationally recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation. With a team of over 70 professionals, the firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. Investors who suffered losses have until September 14, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.

Frequently Asked Questions About the REGN Lawsuit

Q: What specific misstatements does the REGN lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. made materially false or misleading statements regarding the Phase III Fianlimab-Libtayo Study, including statements that allegedly suggested slowing event accrual reflected active-arm performance while omitting clinical differentiation risks and the need for a protocol amendment.

Q: When did Regeneron allegedly mislead investors? A: The Class Period runs from August 1, 2025 to May 15, 2026. The complaint alleges that corrective disclosures on April 29, 2026 and May 15, 2026 revealed information that caused significant stock declines.

Q: What court was the REGN class action filed in? A: The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and is governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Being appointed does not increase individual recovery but gives direct oversight of how the case is run.

Q: What happens after I contact Levi & Korsinsky? A: An attorney will review your trading history at no cost and provide an initial assessment of your potential eligibility.

Q: What if I already sold my REGN shares, can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: Do I need to go to court or give testimony? A: No. The overwhelming majority of class members never appear in court or give depositions. If there is a settlement or recovery, eligible class members generally submit a claim form to seek their portion.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to contact the firm. Securities class actions are generally handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, and no out-of-pocket costs. Any attorneys’ fees and expenses awarded to class counsel are subject to court approval.

CONTACT:

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Ed Korsinsky, Esq.

33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor

New York, NY 10004

[email protected]

Tel: (212) 363-7500

Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — A single clinical readout drove Tenax Therapeutics (TENX) shares down approximately 84% to 85% after the Company disclosed that its the Phase 3 LEVEL trial of TNX-103 missed its primary and key secondary endpoints. If you suffered a loss on your Tenax Therapeutics investment, you are encouraged to click here to submit your information. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. via email at [email protected] or by telephone at (212) 363-7500.

The reported results show a placebo-adjusted improvement in six-minute walk distance of 3.5 meters — not statistically significant — and essentially no difference from placebo on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire symptom score. Topline data had been guided to August 2026, moved up from the third quarter of 2026. Exploratory measures, including a reported 49% reduction in NT-proBNP, were also disclosed alongside the topline results, but did not alter the failed pivotal endpoints.

Levosimendan-based TNX-103 was the Company’s lead clinical program, and Tenax was pre-revenue. In an April 22, 2026 press release attached to a Form 8-K, the Company described itself as expanding its “registrational program globally” and characterized levosimendan’s future as “potentially the first available therapy for PH-HFpEF patients.” The investigation concerns whether the regulatory and clinical risks associated with TNX-103 were adequately disclosed to investors.

Shareholders who lost money on TENX are encouraged to have their losses reviewed at no cost or call (212) 363-7500.

WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY — Ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services’ Top 50 Report for seven consecutive years, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is a nationally recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation. With a team of over 70 professionals, the firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors.

Frequently Asked Questions About the TENX Investigation

Q: Which statements are being investigated as potentially misleading? A: The investigation concerns whether Tenax Therapeutics made materially false or misleading statements regarding the status and prospects of its Phase 3 LEVEL program for TNX-103. After the Company disclosed that the trial missed its primary and key secondary endpoints, the stock price declined approximately 84% to 85%.

Q: How much did TENX stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 84% to 85% after the Company disclosed the failed Phase 3 LEVEL endpoints. Investors who purchased shares at allegedly inflated prices and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.

Q: Who is eligible to participate in the TENX investigation? A: Investors who purchased TENX stock or securities and suffered financial losses may be eligible. Eligibility is based on purchase date and documented losses — not on whether you still hold the shares.

Q: What do TENX investors need to do right now? A: Investors may gather brokerage records showing purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Submit your information for a no-cost, no-obligation evaluation of your potential recovery. No immediate action is required to remain eligible to participate in the investigation.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: If the investigation proceeds to legal action, a lead plaintiff is the investor the court appoints to represent the group of affected investors. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Contacting the firm during the investigation phase preserves that option.

Q: What if I already sold my TENX shares — can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought TENX and sold at a loss may still participate in the investigation.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to submit your information and review whether you may be eligible to recover. Should you choose to participate in any resulting action, these matters are generally handled on a contingency basis, with any attorneys’ fees and expenses subject to court approval.

Q: Do I need to go to court or give testimony? A: No. Participating in the investigation does not require court appearances or depositions. If legal action is later pursued, the overwhelming majority of affected investors never appear in court either.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10004
[email protected]
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

NEW YORK, Aug. 17, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in Wix.com Ltd. (NASDAQ: WIX) of a pending securities class action involving Wix Harmony missing capabilities web development securities allegations. Class Period: February 19, 2025 through May 12, 2026. Check if you might be eligible to recover your investment losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] | (212) 363-7500.

WIX shares declined $29.40 to close at $152.34 on May 21, 2025. Nearly a year later, on May 13, 2026, the stock declined another $20.56 per share to close at just $55.32. The Court has set September 22, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

Wix Harmony Missing Capabilities Web Development Securities Allegations

The lawsuit asserts that Wix failed to disclose that its flagship AI platform, Wix Harmony, had significant ‘holes’ and ‘missing capabilities.’ As alleged, those limitations mattered because professional developer customers were increasingly using competing AI tools, undermining the Company’s representations about its competitive position in AI-powered website creation.

The action claims that investors were told a more favorable story about product readiness and professional-grade AI capabilities than the operational reality allegedly supported.

Competitive AI Tools in Professional Web Development

The complaint focuses on Wix’s AI tools allegedly falling shy of expectations. Key alleged issues include:

• Wix Harmony was allegedly not meeting the workflow needs of professional developer customers.
• The Company allegedly failed to keep pace with product updates and innovation expected by that customer segment.
• Competing AI tools were allegedly being used by professional developers during the Class Period.
• The lawsuit asserts that missing capabilities made prior statements about Wix’s AI positioning materially misleading.
• The alleged limitations became important to investors when Q1 2026 results fell below consensus expectations.

Why Alleged Platform Adequacy Matters to Investors

As alleged, Wix’s growth story depended in part on professional users accepting and expanding use of its AI-powered platform. If those users were turning to competitors because Wix Harmony lacked important functionality, the lawsuit contends that investors needed to know that risk before the market repriced WIX shares.

Investors deserve transparency about material risks that could affect their investments, including alleged platform limitations and customer losses that may affect future growth. The Wix action asserts that professional developers were already turning to competing AI tools while management continued to emphasize Harmony’s promise. — Joseph E. Levi, Esq., managing partner of Levi & Korsinsky, LLP.

The Alleged Professional Developer Customer Problem

The complaint alleges that the May 13, 2026 disclosure corrected prior alleged omissions by acknowledging that Wix Harmony had functionality gaps and that professional developers were using competing AI products. The lawsuit asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.

Learn more about the case
or call (212) 363-7500.

ABOUT LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP — Over the past 20 years, Levi & Korsinsky has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. The firm has extensive expertise in complex securities litigation and a team of over 70 employees. For seven consecutive years, Levi & Korsinsky has ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services’ Top 50 Report. Investors who suffered losses have until September 22, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.

Frequently Asked Questions About the WIX Lawsuit

Q: Who is eligible to join the WIX investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased WIX stock or securities between February 19, 2025 and May 12, 2026 and suffered financial losses may be eligible. Eligibility is based on purchase date and documented losses, not on whether you still hold the shares.

Q: How much did WIX stock drop? A: WIX shares declined $29.40 on May 21, 2025, followed by allegedly related declines of $25.22, $2.37, $8.55, and $3.26 throughout the Class Period, with a final drop of $20.56 on May 13, 2026. Shares ultimately fell from a closing price of $181.74 on May 20, 2025 to just $55.32 on May 13, 2026.

Q: What specific misstatements does the WIX lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Wix.com Ltd. made materially false or misleading statements regarding the competitiveness and performance of its AI-powered product offerings, including Wix Harmony, while allegedly failing to disclose product limitations and loss of professional developer customers to competitors.

Q: What court was the WIX class action filed in? A: The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and is governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Being appointed does not increase individual recovery but gives direct oversight of how the case is run.

Q: What documents do I need to submit my information? A: Brokerage statements or trade confirmations showing purchase dates, share quantities, prices paid, and any subsequent sale dates and prices.

Q: What if I already sold my WIX shares, can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to contact the firm. Securities class actions are generally handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, and no out-of-pocket costs. Any attorneys’ fees and expenses awarded to class counsel are subject to court approval.

CONTACT:

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Ed Korsinsky, Esq.

33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor

New York, NY 10004

[email protected]

Tel: (212) 363-7500

Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.