Market Newsdesk

NEW YORK, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in First Solar, Inc. (NASDAQ: FSLR) that a securities class action has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased securities between February 26, 2025 and February 24, 2026. Check if you can recover your investment losses. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

Guidance downgrades, missed expectations, and analyst commentary drove FSLR shares down a combined $60.76 per share during the Class Period, erasing billions in market capitalization across 107 million outstanding shares. The lead plaintiff deadline is August 24, 2026.

Initial Analyst Optimism During the Class Period

Throughout much of 2025, sell-side coverage of First Solar reflected management’s narrative that U.S. tariff policy was a net positive for the company. The lawsuit contends that analysts built their models on company representations that the trade environment was “long term favorable” and that international facility challenges were manageable and temporary. This optimism persisted even as the company reduced production in Malaysia and Vietnam and lost 6.6 gigawatts of bookings from BP affiliate defaults.

The Jefferies Downgrade: January 7, 2026

The first major break in analyst sentiment came when Jefferies downgraded FSLR from Buy to Hold. The Jefferies analyst identified several issues that had accumulated throughout 2025:

• Repeated downward guidance revisions during the year
• Significant customer de-bookings, including the BP affiliate default
• Margin compression from underutilization costs at international facilities
• International facilities characterized as a “pain point” and ongoing “concern” while tariffs persisted
• A prediction that deployment opportunities would be more limited in 2026

FSLR shares fell $27.67, or 10.29%, to close at $241.11 on January 7, 2026.

The Baird Downgrade: February 25, 2026

After First Solar reported Q4 and full-year 2025 results that missed expectations and issued lower-than-expected FY 2026 revenue guidance, Baird Research downgraded the stock from Outperform to Neutral. Baird cited “several question marks in forward outlook,” reflecting concerns about customer headwinds and permitting delays. FSLR shares fell an additional $33.09, or 13.61%, to close at $210.12.

Speak with an attorney about recovering damages or call (212) 363-7500.

Why Analyst Shifts Matter for FSLR Investors

The action claims that these downgrades represented the market correcting for artificial inflation sustained by management’s allegedly misleading reassurances. As alleged, when independent analysts finally incorporated the true scope of international facility underutilization and onshoring costs into their models, the resulting repricing quantified the gap between what investors were told and what was actually occurring.

“When analyst expectations are built on incomplete or misleading company disclosures, the resulting corrections can cause significant investor harm. In this case, two separate downgrades reflected the market absorbing information that allegedly should have been disclosed much earlier.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Find out if you qualify to recover your per-share losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at (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 August 24, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions About the FSLR Lawsuit

Q: How much did FSLR stock drop? A: Shares suffered two significant declines during the Class Period. On January 7, 2026, FSLR fell $27.67 per share (10.29%) following the Jefferies downgrade. On February 25, 2026, shares fell an additional $33.09 per share (13.61%) after disappointing earnings and a Baird downgrade, closing at $210.12.

Q: What specific misstatements does the FSLR lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges First Solar made materially false or misleading statements regarding the company’s ability to manage U.S. tariff impacts and understated how international facility underutilization and production onshoring would negatively affect projected 2026 performance. When the true state was revealed through analyst downgrades and earnings disclosures, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What is the FSLR lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment is August 24, 2026. This deadline applies only to investors seeking to serve as lead plaintiff. Class members who do not apply may still participate in any recovery without taking action before this date.

Q: What if I already sold my FSLR shares — can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold them. Investors who bought during the class period and sold at a loss may still 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. You submit a claim form to receive your portion of recovery.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: Nothing. Securities class actions are handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, no out-of-pocket costs.

Q: What do FSLR investors need to do right now? A: Gather brokerage records including purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a free, no-obligation evaluation at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500. No immediate action is required to remain eligible as a class member.

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

LOS ANGELES, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Schall, Brown & Schwartz LLP (“SBS”), a national shareholder rights litigation firm, reminds investors of a class action lawsuit against Roblox Corporation (“Roblox” or “the Company”) (NYSE: RBLX) for violations of §§10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Shareholders who purchased shares of RBLX during the class period listed are encouraged to contact the firm regarding possible lead plaintiff appointments. Appointment as lead plaintiff is not required to partake in any recovery.

CLASS PERIOD: October 30, 2025 to April 30, 2026

DEADLINE: August 7, 2026

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click here to participate.

CASE DETAILS: According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Roblox assured investors that it could minimize risks associated with age verification and accurately forecast its business performance. The Company claimed to be “enormously bullish” and able to rely on “tremendous organic growth.” The Company relied on viral events to supply growth while misleading shareholders about how age verification would impact platform engagement and the public’s view of its products. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Roblox, investors suffered damages.

We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall or David Schwartz of Schall, Brown & Schwartz LLP, 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2460, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at 310-301-3335, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also reach us through the firm’s website at www.schallfirm.com, or by email at [email protected].

The class, in this case, has not yet been certified, and until certification occurs, you are not represented by an attorney. If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member.

Join the case to recover your losses

WHY SBS? Schall, Brown & Schwartz LLP represents investors around the world and specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder rights litigation. Bringing together the extensive experience and diverse skillsets of founding partners Brian Schall, Andrew Brown, and David Schwartz, SBS is dedicated to aggressively advocating for every investor.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and rules of ethics.        

CONTACT:

Schall, Brown & Schwartz LLP
Brian Schall, Esq.,
Andrew Brown, Esq.,
David Schwartz, Esq.,
www.schallfirm.com
Office: 310-301-3335
[email protected]

SOURCE:

Schall, Brown & Schwartz LLP

Promise vs. Reality: Intuit told investors to expect 8% TurboTax growth and “sustained growth for years to come” — then cut guidance, acknowledged that “we lost on price,” and saw its shares fall approximately 20% the next trading day.

NEW YORK, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP highlights the contrast between the promises Intuit Inc. (NASDAQ: INTU) made to investors and what actually happened, on behalf of shareholders who purchased securities between August 22, 2025 and May 20, 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.

INTU shares fell $76.86 per share, or 20.02%, to close at $307.07 on May 21, 2026, following disclosures that TurboTax revenue grew only 7% versus the 8% the Company had repeatedly promised. The lead plaintiff deadline is September 8, 2026.

The Promise

Beginning in August 2025, the Company projected TurboTax revenue growth of 8 percent for fiscal 2026 and reaffirmed that figure through November 2025 and February 2026. Management publicly touted “momentum across the company” and stated the Company was “delivering sustained growth for years to come.”

The Reality

On May 20, 2026, results revealed TurboTax revenue grew by only 7%, missing consensus estimates. Management acknowledged being “dissatisfied” with performance and stated the Company “lost on price” among the most price-sensitive filers earning less than $50,000 a year. The complaint alleges the business model was degrading among these consumers even as prior guidance was reaffirmed.

Promise vs. Actual: By the Numbers

• Promised TurboTax revenue growth: 8% — Actual full-year guidance cut to: 7%
• TurboTax online paying units expected growth: only 2%
• Total IRS filers: expected to decline approximately 30 basis points, the “most significant industry-wide contraction since the post-COVID tax season”
• Single-day stock decline: 20.02% ($76.86 per share) on May 21, 2026
• Prior-day decline on the 17% workforce reduction news: 3.95% ($15.78 per share)
• Combined insider stock sales during the Class Period: over $41 million

What the Lawsuit Alleges About the Gap

The complaint contends the Company overstated its competitive advantages and the sustainability of its business model while, in reality, it was losing significant business in TurboTax due to increasing competitive and pricing pressures. As alleged, the previously issued 8% growth guidance was unreliable and unrealistic when reaffirmed.

“Companies that provide specific guidance or expectations about future performance must disclose material information necessary to prevent those statements from being misleading. known risks to those projections. The gap between Intuit’s TurboTax growth outlook and reduced guidance, along with management’s “we lost on price,” raises questions about what investors knew.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

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

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP — Top 50 securities litigation firm (ISS, seven consecutive years). Over 70 professionals. Hundreds of millions recovered.

Frequently Asked Questions About the INTU Lawsuit

Q: What is the INTU class action lawsuit about? A: A securities class action has been filed against Intuit Inc. (NASDAQ: INTU) alleging materially false and misleading statements between August 22, 2025 and May 20, 2026. Shares fell approximately 20.02% after the Company disclosed weak TurboTax results, a cut to its full-year growth guidance from 8% to 7%, and a 17% workforce reduction. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.

Q: What specific misstatements does the INTU lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Intuit made materially false or misleading statements regarding its competitive advantages and the sustainability of its growth, particularly repeated reaffirmations of 8% TurboTax revenue growth while the business was allegedly degrading among price-sensitive consumers. When the reduced results and guidance were disclosed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: How much did INTU stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 20.02%, a decline of $76.86 per share, to close at $307.07 on May 21, 2026, after the Company disclosed disappointing tax-season results and cut its TurboTax growth guidance. Investors who purchased at artificially inflated prices and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.

Q: What if I already sold my INTU 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 if my INTU losses are small — is it still worth contacting a lawyer? A: Yes. There is no minimum loss amount required to participate as a class member.

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 is the INTU lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment is September 8, 2026. This deadline applies only to investors seeking to serve as lead plaintiff. Class members who do not apply may still participate in any recovery without taking action before this date.

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. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in Photronics, Inc. (NASDAQ: PLAB) of a pending securities class action. Class Period: December 10, 2025 through May 27, 2026. Check if you can recover your investment losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] | (212) 363-7500.

Photronics shares lost $19.49 per share, falling 36.42% in a single trading session after the Company disclosed that its widely promoted high-end growth story had slowed. The Court has set September 4, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

The Alleged “Trusted Mask” and “Robust Order” Positioning

The lawsuit asserts that during the Class Period, management repeatedly positioned Photronics as uniquely advantaged in the semiconductor photomask industry by emphasizing its status as the “only U.S. headquartered company that can produce trusted masks” operating the “only commercial high-end U.S. trusted mask facility.” These statements, the action claims, were designed to assure investors that mainstream market softness posed minimal risk because the Company’s strategic pivot toward high-end markets would drive sustained growth.

As alleged, management paired this competitive positioning with characterizations of “robust global order patterns” and “order demand [that] remains healthy” to create a narrative of unstoppable momentum. The complaint contends these representations were materially misleading because they omitted critical information about deteriorating conditions in the design release pipeline that had already begun undermining the Company’s growth trajectory.

Why “Robust Order” Adequacy Allegedly Matters to Investors

The securities action claims that by framing market conditions as fundamentally supportive, management led investors to believe that any seasonal softness following the Chinese New Year holiday would be minor and temporary. Key allegations include:

• Management described mainstream IC weakness as “stabilized” while allegedly knowing that broader pipeline bottlenecks were worsening
• The Company touted a “second consecutive quarterly record” in high-end IC revenue during Q1 2026 while the post-holiday recovery that would sustain those levels had already begun to stall
• Executives emphasized capacity expansion plans at Boise and Allen facilities as evidence of demand strength, allegedly obscuring that elevated fab utilization rates were preventing customers from releasing new designs
• The “trusted mask” narrative allegedly diverted investor attention from the reality that geopolitical uncertainty and memory supply constraints were freezing customer decision-making
• Management characterized the anticipated Q2 seasonal dip as primarily a brief holiday effect, as alleged, when internal visibility already showed a much deeper and more prolonged slowdown

Geopolitical Framing in the Photomask Sector

The complaint further contends that management selectively invoked geopolitical themes to support bullish positioning. Executives highlighted semiconductor reshoring trends and growing U.S. demand as tailwinds for Photronics, while allegedly failing to disclose that the same geopolitical forces, including the U.S.-Iran conflict and trade policy uncertainty, were actively suppressing customer tape-out activity.

“Investors deserve transparency about material risks that could affect their investments. When a company builds its growth narrative around competitive positioning and order strength, shareholders are entitled to know when those very conditions are deteriorating.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Speak with an attorney about recovering damages
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 4, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions About the PLAB Lawsuit

Q: Who is eligible to join the PLAB investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased PLAB stock or securities between December 10, 2025 and May 27, 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 PLAB lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Photronics made materially false or misleading statements regarding the strength of its high-end IC order pipeline, the sustainability of its “trusted mask” competitive positioning, and the anticipated seasonal recovery following Chinese New Year. When the true state was revealed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: How much did PLAB stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 36.42%, a decline of $19.49 per share, after the Company disclosed that its Q2 fiscal 2026 results fell well below expectations and that IC revenue had collapsed 11% sequentially. Investors who purchased shares during the class period at artificially inflated prices may be entitled to compensation.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: Nothing. Securities class actions are handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, no out-of-pocket costs.

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

Q: What do PLAB investors need to do right now? A: Gather brokerage records including purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a free, no-obligation evaluation at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500. No immediate action is required to remain eligible as a class member.

Q: What if I missed the lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline applies only to investors seeking lead plaintiff appointment. Class members who miss it can still participate in any settlement or recovery.

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

NEW YORK, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BTIG downgraded Embecta Corp. (NASDAQ: EMBC) from Buy to Neutral. Wolfe Research titled its coverage note “Ouch! Injection of FY2Q26 Info Stings. US Needs a Bandaid.” Fiscal year 2026 EPS guidance was slashed approximately 40%. Shares lost $5.35 in a single trading session. These analyst reactions followed Embecta’s May 5, 2026 disclosure that its U.S. business had deteriorated far beyond anything management had signaled to the market during the Class Period of November 25, 2025 through May 4, 2026.

Check if you can recover your investment losses
or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

The lead plaintiff deadline is August 17, 2026. Embecta’s stock closed at $9.25 on May 4, 2026, and fell to $3.90 the following day after second quarter results revealed revenue down 17.4% on an adjusted constant currency basis.

Initial Analyst Optimism Built on Management’s Own Words

Analyst coverage heading into the Class Period reflected the confidence Embecta’s leadership projected. At the 44th Annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference on January 14, 2026, the Company described its pen needle franchise as “incredibly resolute” and highlighted stable insulin pen prescription trends. On February 5, 2026, the Company reaffirmed all fiscal year 2026 guidance ranges, including revenue of $1.071 billion to $1.093 billion and adjusted EPS of $2.80 to $3.00. Sell-side models, the lawsuit contends, were calibrated to these representations.

The Downgrades Begin: “Major Miss” and “Guidance Cut”

The May 5, 2026 earnings release shattered those models:

• BTIG characterized the quarter as a “major miss” and “guidance cut,” downgrading EMBC from Buy to Neutral
• Wolfe Research noted EMBC was trading at approximately 2.5x fiscal year 2026 earnings following the collapse, with U.S. underperformance and pen needle share loss identified as the primary negative drivers
• Revised EPS guidance of $1.55 to $1.75 represented an approximately 40% reduction from the $2.80 to $3.00 range management had reaffirmed just three months earlier
• Adjusted operating margin guidance fell from 29%-30% to 22.25%-23.25%, a contraction of nearly 700 basis points at the midpoint
• Free cash flow expectations were cut nearly in half, from $180M-$200M to $95M-$105M
• The Company simultaneously slashed its quarterly dividend from $0.15 to $0.01 per share

Execution Concerns Replace Confidence on Wall Street

The speed and severity of the analyst reassessment reflected how far actual results diverged from what the Company had communicated. As alleged in the securities action filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, management knew or recklessly disregarded that U.S. pen needle weakness, concentrated share loss at a single customer, and shifting patient purchasing patterns toward channels where Embecta does not participate were undermining the guidance it continued to reaffirm publicly.

Wolfe Research’s note specifically flagged “share loss in pen needles” and “overall market volume softness” as the largest contributors to the negative surprise. The complaint asserts these were not sudden developments but trends that were observable internally well before the May 5 corrective disclosure.

“When analyst expectations are built on incomplete or misleading company disclosures, the resulting corrections can cause significant investor harm. The analyst downgrades following Embecta’s May 5 disclosure illustrate how rapidly Wall Street reprices securities when the gap between corporate statements and operational reality is revealed.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Speak with an attorney about recovering damages
or call (212) 363-7500.

Why Analyst Shifts Matter for Embecta Investors

Sell-side analysts function as intermediaries between corporate disclosures and investor decisions. When those intermediaries simultaneously reverse their positions, as occurred with EMBC on May 5, 2026, it confirms that the prior information environment was materially different from the reality that emerged. The 57.8% single-day decline quantifies the extent to which the market, guided by analyst models built on management’s own representations, had overvalued Embecta shares.

The last day to move for lead plaintiff is August 17, 2026.

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.

Frequently Asked Questions About the EMBC Lawsuit

Q: How much did EMBC stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 57.8%, a decline of $5.35 per share, after Embecta disclosed second quarter 2026 results on May 5, 2026 that revealed revenue down over 14%, share loss at a major customer, slashed guidance, and a dividend cut from $0.15 to $0.01 per share. Investors who purchased shares during the class period at artificially inflated prices may be entitled to compensation.

Q: What specific misstatements does the EMBC lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Embecta made materially false or misleading statements regarding the strength of its pen needle segment, the attainability of its fiscal year 2026 guidance, and the stability of its U.S. business during the class period of November 25, 2025 through May 4, 2026. When the true state was revealed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What do EMBC investors need to do right now? A: Gather brokerage records including purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a free, no-obligation evaluation at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500. No immediate action is required to remain eligible as a class member.

Q: What if I already sold my EMBC shares, can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold them. Investors who bought during the class period and sold at a loss may still 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. You submit a claim form to receive your portion of recovery.

Q: Can I join a different law firm’s lawsuit instead? A: Multiple firms often file competing complaints. The court consolidates and appoints a single lead counsel. Contacting Levi & Korsinsky before August 17, 2026 ensures your losses are considered.

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

NEW YORK, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) of a pending securities class action. Class Period: May 1, 2025 through January 28, 2026. Check if you can recover your investment losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] | (212) 363-7500.

Microsoft shares traded above $550 during the Class Period while the Company allegedly concealed material risks tied to multibillion-dollar AI partnerships. The Court has set August 11, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

“Investors deserve transparency about material risks that could affect their investments. When a company commits tens of billions of dollars to partnerships structured so that investment dollars flow back as revenue, shareholders are entitled to understand the circularity and concentration risks involved.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

The Alleged OpenAI and Anthropic Concentration Risk

The lawsuit asserts that management repeatedly downplayed concerns about the structure and risk profile of Microsoft’s AI investment strategy. Microsoft invested over $13 billion in OpenAI and committed up to $5 billion in Anthropic, while simultaneously entering arrangements where those same partners committed to purchasing hundreds of billions in Azure services and compute capacity.

As alleged, this created a circular dynamic that defendants failed to adequately disclose, while also concealing significant problems with Copilot product quality, user adoption, and competitive positioning.

How Circular Arrangements Allegedly Inflated Growth Metrics

• OpenAI contracted to purchase $250 billion in incremental Azure services, while Microsoft retained a 27% stake valued at $135 billion
• Anthropic committed to $30 billion of Azure compute capacity plus up to one gigawatt of additional capacity as part of a deal where Microsoft invested up to $5 billion
• Management cited Azure revenue growth of 33% to 40% during the Class Period as evidence of organic AI demand without adequately disclosing how much was tied to these reciprocal arrangements
• The action claims defendants failed to disclose the concentration risk of depending on a small number of LLM partners for a significant portion of Azure’s AI-driven growth
• NVIDIA was also part of the Anthropic partnership structure, adding further interdependency across the AI investment ecosystem
• The Company planned to increase total AI capacity by 80% and roughly double its total data center footprint over two years based on what the lawsuit contends were overstated demand signals

Why AI Capital Expenditure Returns Allegedly Mattered to Investors

The securities action claims that management represented Microsoft was “well positioned to achieve suitable returns on its AI-related investments” while failing to disclose significant technical, organizational, and adoption problems with its Copilot products that undermined those representations. Investors who purchased MSFT shares during the Class Period allegedly did so at prices inflated by these undisclosed risks.

Speak with an attorney about recovering damages
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 MSFT Lawsuit

Q: Who is eligible to join the MSFT investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased MSFT stock or securities between May 1, 2025 and January 28, 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 MSFT lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Microsoft made materially false or misleading statements regarding the success and adoption of its AI initiatives, including the Copilot product family and Azure cloud platform, while failing to disclose significant technical, organizational, and interoperability problems affecting Copilot, as well as the diversion of computing capacity away from Azure to fix those problems. When the true state was revealed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What do MSFT investors need to do right now? A: Gather brokerage records including purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a free, no-obligation evaluation at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500. No immediate action is required to remain eligible as a class member.

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 MSFT shares — can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold them. Investors who bought during the class period and sold at a loss may still participate.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: Nothing. Securities class actions are handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, no out-of-pocket costs.

Q: How long will the lawsuit take to resolve? A: Securities class actions typically take two to four years from initial filing to resolution.

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

NEW YORK, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: GTM) that two senior executives are named as individual defendants in a securities class action covering purchases between November 3, 2025 and May 11, 2026. Find out if you qualify to recover losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

Shares fell $1.98 per share, a 33% decline, after ZoomInfo disclosed a sharp deterioration in its 2026 growth outlook on May 11, 2026. The Court has set August 24, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

The Named Individual Defendants

The complaint names Henry Schuck, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, and M. Graham O’Brien, Chief Financial Officer, as controlling persons of ZoomInfo during the entire Class Period. As CEO and Chairman, Schuck held dual authority over both corporate strategy and board governance. O’Brien, as CFO, directed financial reporting, revenue guidance, and investor communications. Both executives signed SEC filings, participated in earnings calls, and presented at investor conferences where the alleged misrepresentations were made.

Sarbanes-Oxley Certification Obligations

Under Sections 302 and 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Schuck and O’Brien personally certified the accuracy and completeness of ZoomInfo’s quarterly and annual reports filed with the SEC. These certifications attested that:

• Financial statements fairly presented the Company’s financial condition in all material respects
• Reports did not contain untrue statements of material fact or omit material facts necessary to avoid misleading investors
• Internal controls were designed to ensure material information was made known to the certifying officers
• Any significant deficiencies or fraud involving management were disclosed to auditors and the audit committee

The lawsuit contends these certifications were made while Schuck and O’Brien knew or should have known that ZoomInfo’s legacy seat-based subscription business was deteriorating and that customers were migrating toward consumption-based models faster than publicly acknowledged.

Section 20(a) Control Person Framework

Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 imposes liability on individuals who control entities that violate Section 10(b). The complaint asserts that Schuck and O’Brien possessed the power and authority to control the contents of ZoomInfo’s SEC filings, press releases, earnings call statements, and investor conference presentations. The pleading further alleges both executives were provided with copies of the Company’s public statements prior to issuance and had the ability to prevent their release or cause corrections.

Scienter Allegations

The action charges that Schuck and O’Brien knew adverse facts had not been disclosed to investors and that positive representations being made were materially false or misleading at the time they were issued. Both executives repeatedly touted improving net revenue retention, 20%-plus operations growth, and AI product momentum across multiple public forums from November 2025 through February 2026, while allegedly concealing weakening downmarket retention and the growing adoption of internally developed AI-driven go-to-market solutions that reduced demand for the Company’s products.

“Corporate officers have a duty to ensure their companies’ public statements are accurate and complete. When executives personally certify SEC filings, they assume individual responsibility for the information investors rely upon to make purchasing decisions.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Submit your information to join the recovery
or call Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at (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 GTM Lawsuit

Q: Who are the defendants named in the GTM lawsuit? A: The complaint names ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. and individual defendants including Henry Schuck (CEO and Chairman) and M. Graham O’Brien (CFO), who signed SEC filings, made public statements, and certified financial disclosures under Sarbanes-Oxley during the Class Period.

Q: What is the GTM class action lawsuit about? A: A securities class action has been filed against ZoomInfo Technologies (NASDAQ: GTM) alleging materially false and misleading statements between November 3, 2025 and May 11, 2026. Shares fell approximately 33% after the truth was revealed, causing significant losses for shareholders.

Q: How much did GTM stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 33%, a decline of $1.98 per share, after the company disclosed a sharp decline in its 2026 growth outlook and lowered full-year financial guidance. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period at artificially inflated prices may be entitled to compensation.

Q: What do GTM investors need to do right now? A: Gather brokerage records including purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a free, no-obligation evaluation at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500. No immediate action is required to remain eligible as a class member.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: Nothing. Securities class actions are handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, no out-of-pocket costs.

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

Q: What is the GTM lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment is August 24, 2026. This deadline applies only to investors seeking to serve as lead plaintiff. Class members who do not apply may still participate in any recovery without taking action before this date.

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

NEW YORK, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Hub Group, Inc. (“Hub Group” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: HUBG) on behalf of investors that purchased or otherwise acquired Hub Group securities between April 28, 2023 and May 11, 2026 (the “Class Period”).

CLICK HERE TO RECEIVE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS INVESTIGATION

If you are an investor in Hub Group 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 August 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.

On February 5, 2026, Hub Group announced preliminary fourth quarter and full year 2025 results and disclosed the identification of a $77 million accounting error due to “the understatement of purchased transportation costs and accounts payable in the first nine months of 2025.” Additionally, the Company said it “plans to restate its financial statements for the first, second and third quarters of 2025,” and “is continuing to assess the potential impact to its consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023.”

On this news, the price of Hub Group stock fell $9.37 per share, or 18.25%, to close at $41.96 per share on February 6, 2026.

Then, on May 12, 2026, Hub Group announced that it had “identified certain transactions that were prematurely or incorrectly recognized or not adequately supported,” causing its 2023 and 2024 annual reports filed with the SEC to be “materially misstated,” such that they “should no longer be relied upon.” The Company did not quantify the expected misstatement, although it stated that it “expects to conclude that it did not maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting for each of the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023.”

On this news, the price of Hub Group stock fell $5.24 per share, about 12.5%, to close at $36.62 per share on May 12, 2026.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that throughout the Class Period, the Company’s financial statements contained material misstatements caused by the premature and incorrect recognition of certain transactions and other material misstatements caused by the understatement of purchased transportation costs and accounts payable.

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/hub-group-inc/

NEW YORK, Aug. 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in Insulet Corporation (NASDAQ: PODD) of a pending securities class action. Class Period: February 21, 2025 through May 26, 2026. Check if you can recover your investment losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] | (212) 363-7500.

After Insulet’s first Medical Device Correction in March 2026, shares fell $16.23 per share (6.88%). A second MDC on May 26, 2026, drove shares down another $7.79 (5.07%) to $146.01. The Court has set August 31, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

How Management Allegedly Downplayed a Systemic Problem

The lawsuit asserts that after Insulet announced its March 2026 Medical Device Correction affecting certain Omnipod 5 lots, the Company characterized the issue as limited to specific lots and not indicative of broader product concerns. Insulet stated that “all other Omnipod® 5 Pods and Omnipod® products remain safe to use” and characterized the affected units as only “1.5% of pods that were produced in the last year.” As alleged, these reassurances kept the stock trading at artificially inflated prices by failing to disclose that the manufacturing and quality-control issues identified in the March 2026 Medical Device Correction were not limited to the specific lots initially identified.

The Alleged Scope Concealment After March 2026

The action claims that between the two corrective disclosures, management made repeated statements designed to minimize investor concern:

• The Company described the March 2026 issue as affecting only “specific lots,” suggesting the defect was batch-specific rather than process-wide
• A senior medical officer stated publicly that “pods that are not recalled are very safe to use,” as alleged in the complaint
• Management represented that corrective actions had addressed the identified issue and that the problem was limited in scope
• On the Q1 2026 earnings call, the Company claimed it “remain[ed] focused on quality, reliability and customer safety” and had “implemented targeted fixes”
• The FDA later disclosed 476 Medical Device Reports potentially linked to the March MDC, far exceeding Insulet’s initially reported 29 Serious Adverse Events
• On April 29, 2026, management stated that corrective actions had been implemented to address the identified issue and characterized the problem as limited to specific lots

Why the May 2026 Disclosure Shattered the Containment Narrative

When the second MDC arrived on May 26, 2026, it revealed that the cannula tear problem extended across Omnipod 5, Omnipod Dash, and legacy Omnipod Eros products, affecting approximately 7 million Pods representing 8.5% of 2025 global production. The Company itself admitted both MDCs “were related to cannula tears associated with cannula handling at the Company’s Acton, Massachusetts facility.” Goldman Sachs wrote that it was “not so sure that referencing back to the March MDC sufficiently captures the magnitude of the quality issues.”

Speak with an attorney about recovering damages
or call (212) 363-7500.

“Investors deserve transparency about material risks that could affect their investments. When a company represents that a manufacturing issue is limited in scope, investors may rely on those disclosures when evaluating their investments. The allegations contend that the scope of the manufacturing and quality-control issues affecting Omnipod products was broader than what shareholders were told between the two Medical Device Corrections.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Check if you can recover your investment losses
or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at (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 August 31, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions About the PODD Lawsuit

Q: Who is eligible to join the PODD investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased PODD stock or securities between February 21, 2025 and May 26, 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 PODD lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Insulet made materially false or misleading statements regarding the safety of its Omnipod products and the scope of manufacturing defects at its Acton, Massachusetts facility. After the March 2026 Medical Device Correction, Insulet understated the scope of the manufacturing issue, and that the stock price declined sharply after subsequent disclosures revealed broader quality-control concerns.

Q: How much did PODD stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 6.88%, or $16.23 per share, after the first Medical Device Correction disclosure on March 12, 2026. Following the second MDC on May 26, 2026, shares fell another 5.07%, or $7.79, to close at $146.01.

Q: What do PODD investors need to do right now? A: Gather brokerage records including purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a free, no-obligation evaluation at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500. No immediate action is required to remain eligible as a class member.

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

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: Nothing. Securities class actions are handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, no out-of-pocket costs.

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 missed the lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline applies only to investors seeking lead plaintiff appointment. Class members who miss it can still participate in any settlement or recovery.

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