Market Newsdesk

NEW YORK, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP encourages investors who suffered losses in Camping World Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: CWH) to contact the firm. Those who purchased CWH securities between April 29, 2025 and February 24, 2026 may be entitled to recover damages. Find out if you are eligible to recover losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

CWH shares fell 24.8% on October 29, 2025 and another 16.5% on February 25, 2026, as corrective disclosures revealed alleged inventory management failures and missed SG&A targets. The window to apply for lead plaintiff closes on May 11, 2026.

April 29, 2025: Ambitious Guidance Sets Investor Expectations

The Class Period opened with Camping World issuing Q1 2025 results and projecting SG&A as a percentage of gross profit would improve by 600 to 700 basis points for the full year. The Company reported $1.4 billion in revenue and touted “consistent growth in real time,” the lawsuit recounts. Management described itself as “rigorously managing” SG&A to offset macroeconomic variability.

April 30, 2025: Earnings Call Reinforces Optimistic Narrative

The following day, during the Q1 earnings call, senior leadership doubled down. As detailed in the action, management emphasized “proper inventory planning, proper stocking” and a “very healthy balance sheet.” The Company highlighted record used inventory procurement in March and stated it was “on pace to set another record in April.” Used vehicle gross margins of 18.6% were cited as proof of year-over-year improvement.

July 29-30, 2025: Q2 Results Sustain the Narrative While Quietly Lowering the Bar

Camping World reported Q2 revenue of $2.0 billion. As set forth in the complaint, management described “surgically manag[ing] inventory” using “sophisticated data analytics” and declared the balance sheet had “never been stronger.” However, the SG&A improvement target was quietly reduced from 600-700 basis points to 300-400 basis points, a material revision the securities action alleges was presented as a minor adjustment rather than evidence of systemic problems.

October 28, 2025: First Corrective Disclosure Shocks Investors

After market close, Camping World reported Q3 results revealing:

• New vehicle revenue fell $58.1 million (7.0% decline)
• Average new vehicle selling price dropped 8.6%
• New vehicle gross margin decreased 81 basis points to 12.7%
• 2026 Adjusted EBITDA guidance was set at only the “low $300 million range”

CWH shares dropped $4.17 per share (24.8%) the next trading day on unusually heavy volume.

February 24, 2026: Full Scope of Problems Emerges

The Company’s Q4 2025 results disclosed that it had “implemented strict, corrective inventory management objectives,” a stark reversal from months of touting surgical precision. Net loss widened 83.3% to $109.1 million. Gross profit fell $38.7 million. SG&A as a percent of gross profit improved only 190 basis points, falling far short of even the reduced 300-400 basis point target. The Company also suspended its quarterly dividend. CWH shares fell another $1.79 (16.5%) on February 25, 2026.

Submit your claim before the deadline or call (212) 363-7500.

“Timely disclosure of material developments is fundamental to fair and efficient markets. The timeline in this case raises questions about whether known operational headwinds were communicated to shareholders with appropriate urgency.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

ABOUT THE FIRM — For over two decades, Levi & Korsinsky has represented shareholders in securities class actions. Ranked in ISS Top 50 for seven consecutive years. Those wishing to serve as lead plaintiff must act by May 11, 2026.

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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in LKQ Corporation (NASDAQ: LKQ) of a pending securities class action. Class Period: February 27, 2023 through July 23, 2025. Check if you can recover your investment losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] | (212) 363-7500.

LKQ shares suffered successive declines of 14.9%, 12.4%, 11.6%, and 17.8% as the gap between projected synergies and actual performance widened over several corrective disclosures. The Court has set June 22, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

The Alleged Synergy Inflation Scheme

At the heart of this securities action is a $2.1 billion acquisition that management promised would be immediately beneficial. The lawsuit asserts that throughout the Class Period, the Company promoted escalating synergy targets, raising projections from $55 million to $65 million, even as the underlying business was deteriorating. Management represented that the deal presented “minimal integration risk” and would “drive profitable growth,” while the acquired FinishMaster operation was hemorrhaging customers to lower-priced competitors.

Unrealistic Financial Guidance in the Face of Deterioration

The action claims that management issued financial guidance built on synergy assumptions they knew or should have known were unsustainable. Key allegations include:

• Management projected the acquisition would be accretive in 2024, while customer attrition was already accelerating
• Synergy targets were raised from $55 million to $65 million even as the acquired business lost major accounts
• Revenue guidance was repeatedly set at levels the North American segment could not achieve, ultimately missing targets by $200 million
• EBITDA margin projections ignored competitive pricing pressures that were already eroding profitability
• Integration was described as “ahead of schedule” while the business it was integrating was shrinking

Why Synergy Adequacy Allegedly Matters to Investors

When a company pays $2.1 billion for an acquisition and tells investors the deal will generate tens of millions in synergies, shareholders rely on those projections to value the stock. As alleged in the action, when cost savings are touted while the revenue base supporting those savings collapses, investors are left holding shares priced on a fiction. The Wholesale North America segment eventually missed EBITDA targets by $24 million in one quarter and $20 million in the next, with year-over-year declines of 9% and 11% respectively.

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 raises synergy projections while the acquired business is losing its customer base, shareholders are entitled to know the full picture before committing capital.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Check if you can recover your investment losses
or contact 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 LKQ Lawsuit

Q: Who is eligible to join the LKQ investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased LKQ stock or securities between February 27, 2023 and July 23, 2025 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 LKQ stock drop? A: Shares suffered multiple declines of 14.9%, 12.4%, 11.6%, and 17.8% as the truth about the Uni-Select acquisition emerged. Investors who purchased shares during the class period at artificially inflated prices may be entitled to compensation.

Q: What specific misstatements does the LKQ lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges LKQ made materially false or misleading statements regarding the success and synergy potential of the Uni-Select and FinishMaster acquisition, while concealing that the acquired business was losing major customers and market share.

Q: What do LKQ 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 LKQ 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 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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP reminds purchasers of Gartner, Inc. (NYSE: IT) securities of a pending securities class action.

THE CASE: A class action seeks to recover damages for investors who purchased Gartner securities between February 4, 2025, and February 2, 2026.

YOUR OPTIONS: You may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out-of-pocket fees. See if you can recover losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

Gartner shares fell from $336.71 to $243.93 on August 5, 2025, a single-day loss of $92.78 per share (27.55%). A second corrective disclosure on February 3, 2026, drove shares from $202.40 to $160.16, an additional decline of $42.24 per share (20.87%). Investors have until May 18, 2026, to seek lead plaintiff status.

How Gartner’s Subscription Revenue Engine Works

Gartner generates approximately 77% of consolidated revenue from research subscriptions. These subscriptions are measured by Contract Value, an FX-neutral metric representing the annualized value of all active subscription contracts. CV growth at year-end effectively determines 80% to 85% of the following year’s subscription revenue. When CV growth decelerates, subscription revenue growth follows with near-mathematical certainty.

The Consulting segment, representing roughly 9% of revenue, depends on backlog, pipeline conversion, and labor utilization. Management guided Consulting revenue of at least $565 million for fiscal 2025, later revised to $575 million, and repeatedly told investors the segment’s outlook was “unchanged” quarter after quarter.

The Alleged CV Deceleration Trajectory

The complaint chronicles a steady deterioration in Gartner’s core growth metric that management allegedly failed to disclose adequately:

• Q4 2024 exit CV growth rate stood at 7.8%, which the lawsuit contends already trailed the 12%-16% medium-term target by a wide margin
• Q1 2025 CV growth held at 7%, with global CV declining $63 million sequentially from Q4 2024, roughly 80% attributable to U.S. federal government losses. Ex-federal CV growth was 8%.
• Q2 2025 CV growth dropped to 5% overall and 6% excluding federal contracts, a 200 basis point deceleration in one quarter
• By Q4 2025, CV growth had fallen considerably further. As disclosed on February 3, 2026, ex-federal CV growth had fallen to only 4%; including federal IT reported only 1% growth.
• The Consulting segment simultaneously revealed a significant shortfall of more than 13% for the quarter against internal projections, contradicting repeated assurances that the outlook was “unchanged”

Calculate your potential recovery or call (212) 363-7500.

Alleged Consulting Segment Misrepresentation

The filing states that management maintained Consulting revenue guidance of “at least $575 million” through at least the November 4, 2025, earnings call, issuing implied fourth quarter guidance of “at least” $176 million against year-to-date performance of roughly 400 million. As set forth in the complaint, this characterization was misleading because the Company was allegedly already experiencing conditions that made its Consulting targets unreachable. The February 3, 2026, disclosure marked the first time Gartner acknowledged a significant Consulting shortfall against its own internal expectations.

“The complaint raises serious questions about whether investors received accurate information about Gartner’s ability to sustain its contract value trajectory and meet consulting segment targets in the face of accelerating macroeconomic headwinds,” stated Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

The action contends that DOGE-driven federal spending cuts, tariff-related cost-cutting by corporate clients, and lengthened purchase decision cycles were eroding Gartner’s growth engine faster than management communicated to shareholders.

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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP notifies investors that Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, Executive Chairman and Global Chief Scientific and Medical Officer of ImmunityBio, Inc. (NASDAQ: IBRX), is named as an individual defendant in a securities class action alleging he personally made false and misleading statements about the Company’s lead biologic product, ANKTIVA. Shareholders who purchased IBRX securities between January 19, 2026 and March 24, 2026 and suffered losses are encouraged to request a free, no-obligation case evaluation or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

Following publicization of an FDA Warning Letter on March 24, 2026, IBRX shares fell $1.98 per share, a 21% decline, closing at $7.42.

Dr. Soon-Shiong’s Role During the Class Period

Unlike many securities fraud cases where executives are named for signing SEC filings or approving earnings releases, Dr. Soon-Shiong is alleged to have been the direct source of the false statements at issue. On January 19, 2026, the complaint identifies Dr. Soon-Shiong as appearing personally on The Sean Spicer Show podcast, where he claimed ANKTIVA could “treat all cancers,” advertised it as a “vaccine” for cancer, and promoted subcutaneous injection, a route of administration for which the drug is not approved. The FDA’s Warning Letter specifically cited Dr. Soon-Shiong by name as the individual who made these representations.

What Dr. Soon-Shiong Allegedly Oversaw

As Executive Chairman and Global Chief Scientific and Medical Officer, Dr. Soon-Shiong occupied a dual role that gave him authority over both corporate strategy and scientific communications. The action contends he:

• Personally appeared on a nationally broadcast podcast to promote ANKTIVA for unapproved uses, including “all cancers” and cancer prevention after radiation exposure
• Described ANKTIVA as a “single jab” and “little vial that you inject subcutaneously” despite the drug being approved only for intravesical use
• Advertised ANKTIVA a “Cancer Therapeutic Vaccine” when the FDA has confirmed it is not a vaccine and has no demonstrated preventative effect
• Claimed ANKTIVA was promoting increased “Interleuken-15 (IL-15), which it characterized as “the most important molecule that could cure cancer” when clinical data from QUILT-3.032 do not support claims of ANKTIVA as a cure for cancer
• Made these statements on a Company-linked podcast that was later removed from ImmunityBio’s website following the FDA Warning Letter

“Individual officers who sign SEC certifications bear personal responsibility for the accuracy of corporate disclosures. When a senior executive personally makes promotional claims that the FDA later determines are false or misleading, questions of individual liability become especially significant,” stated Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Section 20(a) Context for Dr. Soon-Shiong

The complaint asserts Dr. Soon-Shiong is liable as a controlling person under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. As pleaded, he directly participated in management at the highest levels, was privy to confidential proprietary information, and was involved in the dissemination of the false statements at issue. His position gave him the power and authority to cause the Company to engage in the alleged wrongful conduct that artificially inflated the market price of IBRX securities.

Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a confidential loss assessment at no cost or call (212) 363-7500.

LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: May 26, 2026

About Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

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

Frequently Asked Questions About the IBRX Lawsuit

Q: Who are the defendants named in the IBRX lawsuit? A: The complaint names ImmunityBio, Inc. and Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, Executive Chairman and Global Chief Scientific and Medical Officer, as defendants. Dr. Soon-Shiong is alleged to have personally made the false and misleading promotional statements that triggered the FDA Warning Letter.

Q: What is the IBRX class action lawsuit about? A: A securities class action has been filed against ImmunityBio alleging materially false and misleading statements between January 19, 2026 and March 24, 2026 regarding the capabilities of ANKTIVA. Shares fell approximately 21% after an FDA Warning Letter was publicized, causing significant losses for shareholders.

Q: What do IBRX 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 IBRX 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 IBRX lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment is May 26, 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: 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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — From a closing price of $15.43 on February 26, 2026, Hercules Capital, Inc. (NYSE: HTGC) shares plummeted to $14.21 the following day, erasing $1.22 per share in value after a corrective report exposed what the lawsuit alleges is fundamental weakness in the Company’s operations. Find out if you qualify to recover your per-share losses. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

The 7.9% single-day decline occurred on unusually heavy trading volume, as the market rapidly repriced HTGC shares to remove what the securities action alleges was artificial inflation embedded in the stock throughout the Class Period of May 1, 2025 through February 27, 2026. To be considered for lead plaintiff, investors must file by May 19, 2026.

The February 27, 2026 After-Hours Repricing Event

At approximately 11:00 a.m. EST on February 27, 2026, Hunterbrook Media published “The Myth of Hercules Capital.” The report alleged that the Company’s deal sourcing process amounted to copying investments from Google Ventures’ website, that a four-person valuation team lacked adequate checks, and that software debt exposure was hidden through sector misclassification. The market’s swift reaction stripped $1.22 from each share of HTGC.

Alleged Investor Damages and Loss Causation

The securities action maintains that throughout the Class Period, HTGC shares traded at artificially inflated prices because investors relied on representations about disciplined underwriting, rigorous due diligence, and a multi-step Board-approved valuation process. The lawsuit asserts these representations lacked a reasonable basis. Key alleged damages factors include:

• HTGC shares lost 7.9% of their value in a single trading session on February 27, 2026
• The decline occurred on unusually heavy volume, indicating broad market reassessment
• NAV per share had been reported as rising steadily from $11.55 to $12.13 across four quarters during the Class Period
• The Company managed $5.7 billion in total assets, with portfolio valuations allegedly handled by just four people
• Software debt was allegedly marked at 100 cents on the dollar despite industry-wide distress in software lending

The Alleged Artificial Inflation Removal

Plaintiffs assert that the $1.22 per-share decline represents the partial removal of artificial inflation that had been maintained by repeated statements touting “disciplined underwriting” and rigorous origination. The filing states that once the market learned the true nature of these processes, the inflation dissipated rapidly.

Join the HTGC recovery action or call Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at (212) 363-7500.

“When companies fail to disclose material information, shareholders may suffer significant losses. The speed and magnitude of the February 27 repricing suggests the market viewed these revelations as highly material to Hercules Capital’s valuation.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

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.

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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP examines the adequacy of Gossamer Bio, Inc.’s (NASDAQ: GOSS) risk disclosures in connection with a pending securities class action. Evaluate whether you qualify to recover investment losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

GOSS shares collapsed over 80%, falling $1.71 per share to $0.42, after the Company revealed its Phase 3 PROSERA study failed its primary endpoint. The lead plaintiff deadline is June 1, 2026.

What the Company Disclosed

Throughout the Class Period of June 16, 2025 through February 20, 2026, Gossamer issued press releases and quarterly filings that projected confidence in the PROSERA trial design and patient selection process. The action contends that these disclosures painted an overwhelmingly positive picture of the study’s trajectory without providing shareholders with specific, actionable warnings about geographic enrollment risks that were allegedly already known to the Company.

As pleaded, the forward-looking statements at issue were not identified as forward-looking when made and lacked meaningful cautionary language identifying factors that could cause actual results to differ materially.

What the Lawsuit Alleges Was Missing

The securities action asserts that Gossamer’s public disclosures omitted critical information that would have altered a reasonable investor’s assessment:

• The Latin American clinical sites enrolled a heavily-treated, lower-risk patient population that diverged from the stated patient selection goals
• This enrollment pattern created a foreseeable risk of an outsized placebo response that could compromise the pre-specified 0.025 alpha threshold
• The Company’s stated “insights from the Phase 2 TORREY Study” were allegedly not reflected in actual enrollment characteristics at Latin American sites
• No specific risk factor warned investors that geographic enrollment disparities could jeopardize the primary endpoint
• Generic boilerplate language about clinical trial uncertainty allegedly substituted for disclosure of a specific, known vulnerability

Why Generic Warnings May Not Protect

The complaint challenges the sufficiency of Gossamer’s risk factor disclosures. Under federal securities law, generic cautions about the possibility that clinical trials “may not succeed” do not immunize a company from liability when specific, concrete risks are already apparent internally. The lawsuit maintains that defendants were aware of the Latin American enrollment characteristics as the drug sponsor with direct access to site-level data, yet chose to issue reassuring statements about patient selection goals being “accomplished” rather than flagging the specific placebo response vulnerability.

“Generic risk factor language cannot substitute for disclosing specific, known problems that are already affecting a company’s operations. When a company possesses detailed enrollment data showing a material divergence from stated trial objectives, investors deserve to be informed.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Assess your eligibility to pursue a recovery claim
or call (212) 363-7500.

LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: June 1, 2026

About Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

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

Frequently Asked Questions About the GOSS Lawsuit

Q: What specific misstatements does the GOSS lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Gossamer Bio made materially false or misleading statements regarding the Phase 3 PROSERA trial design and patient selection, specifically concealing that Latin American site enrollment characteristics created a high risk of outsized placebo response. When the true state was revealed, the stock price declined over 80%.

Q: When did Gossamer Bio allegedly mislead investors? A: The class period runs from June 16, 2025 to February 20, 2026. The alleged fraud was revealed through corrective disclosures on February 23, 2026, causing a single-day decline of over 80%.

Q: What do GOSS 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 GOSS 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 if Gossamer Bio goes bankrupt before the case resolves? A: Securities class action claims survive bankruptcy in most circumstances. D&O insurance policies are frequently the primary source of settlement funds.

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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — “We also expect to return to adjusted EBITDA growth in the second half, targeting around $1 billion in adjusted EBITDA for the year.” That was the promise. Three months later, Coty Inc. (NYSE: COTY) withdrew that guidance entirely and estimated Q3 adjusted EBITDA of just $100 million to $110 million. Find out if you can recover losses from Coty’s broken projections or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

Investors who purchased COTY stock between November 5, 2025 and February 4, 2026 watched shares fall 22% from $3.43 to $2.66 per share after the Company’s corrective disclosures. The lead plaintiff deadline is May 22, 2026.

The Promise

On November 5, 2025, management told investors that business trends were “already improving, in line to slightly ahead of our expectations, particularly in Prestige.” The Company projected like-for-like sales would return to growth in the second half of fiscal 2026 and that sell-in and sell-out would reach alignment. Adjusted EBITDA was targeted at approximately $1 billion for the full year, as claimed in the earnings call.

The Reality

By February 2026, every major projection had reversed:

• Prestige Fragrance Sell-Out: Promised to be “in line with the market” and accelerating. Actual Q2 result: flattish, underperforming the market by several points
• Consumer Beauty Trends: Described as undergoing strategic transformation with “positive green shoots.” Actual result: a large gap in sell-out relative to U.S. mass cosmetics, with weakening sales trends driving a mid-single-digit Q3 revenue decline
• FY26 Adjusted EBITDA: Targeted at ~$1 billion. Actual: guidance withdrawn; Q3 EBITDA estimated at only $100M to $110M
• Operational Discipline: Touted a “performance and operational excellence office” and cost savings. Actual: the incoming interim CEO admitted discipline had “slipped across the organization over the past 2 years”
• Gross Margin: Implied stability from cost initiatives. Actual: 200 basis point decline, with another 200 to 300 bps decline projected for Q3

What the Lawsuit Contends About the Gap

The securities action asserts that these were not ordinary business misses. The complaint charges that management disseminated materially false and misleading statements about Coty’s growth potential while concealing that the Consumer Beauty segment was already underperforming, that margins were being compressed by increased marketing spend, and that Prestige fragrance momentum was slowing. The gap between promise and result, the filing states, caused shareholders to purchase COTY stock at artificially inflated prices.

“Companies that make specific promises to investors about future performance have an obligation to disclose known risks to those projections. The contrast between what Coty projected in November and what it revealed in February raises important questions for shareholders.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Check whether you qualify to recover your Coty investment losses or call (212) 363-7500.

LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: May 22, 2026

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is a nationally recognized shareholder rights firm. Over the past 20 years, the firm has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Ranked in ISS Top 50 for seven consecutive years.

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

The Red Flags: What Insiders Allegedly Knew Before Shareholders Did

NEW YORK, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that a securities class action has been filed against Vital Farms, Inc. (NASDAQ: VITL).

YOU MAY BE AFFECTED IF YOU:

• Purchased Vital Farms stock between May 8, 2025 and February 26, 2026
• Lost money on your VITL investment

Submit your information to recover losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

VITL shares fell $2.68 per share, a 10.8% single-day decline, closing at $22.11 on February 26, 2026, after management finally admitted that ERP-related shipment disruptions had cost the Company critical retail shelf space it was still struggling to recapture.

What They Allegedly Knew

The securities action contends that Vital Farms’ leadership possessed detailed, real-time knowledge of the ERP system’s operational consequences long before shareholders learned the truth. The Company’s own SEC filings acknowledged that the ERP transition required “significant resources, including the time and attention of our management and key crew members.” Yet as the switchover approached and then occurred, public statements allegedly painted a picture of seamless execution while internally, production had ground to a slowdown and retail partners were pulling shelf space.

The Red Flags That Emerged

• On May 8, 2025, the ERP launch was pushed “from summer to early fall 2025 to ensure flawless switchover,” the lawsuit asserts, signaling internally recognized implementation risks that were not disclosed to shareholders
• On August 7, 2025, the Company raised fiscal year guidance to $770 million while the action claims defendants knew the imminent ERP cutover would disrupt order fulfillment during the critical holiday selling season
• On November 4, 2025, management acknowledged production slowed “for the first two weeks of the fourth quarter” but allegedly misled investors by claiming the slowdown “was always part of our plan” and had “no impact on our guidance,” while simultaneously raising that guidance to $775 million
• By the time the February 26, 2026 disclosure arrived, actual fiscal year 2025 revenue of $759.4 million fell $15.6 million short of the Company’s own guidance, and EPS of $0.35 missed consensus of $0.39

Inside Knowledge vs. Public Statements

The complaint charges that management’s repeated characterizations of the ERP transition as “on track” and “working very well” stood in stark contrast to what was actually happening on the ground. The filing states that defendants were aware, or reckless in not knowing, that implementing the ERP would cause shipment delays, production slowdowns, and the loss of retail shelf space. Rather than disclose these material consequences, the action claims, defendants raised revenue guidance twice during the Class Period.

“The timeline raises important questions about when certain risks were known internally versus when they were disclosed to the investing public,” stated Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Act now to protect your rights or call (212) 363-7500.

About the Firm

ABOUT THE FIRM — Levi & Korsinsky represents investors in securities class actions nationwide, with a track record of recovering hundreds of millions for shareholders harmed by alleged corporate concealment. Ranked among ISS Top 50 for seven consecutive years. Lead plaintiff applications must be submitted by May 26, 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions About the VITL Lawsuit

Q: When did Vital Farms allegedly mislead investors? A: The class period runs from May 8, 2025 to February 26, 2026. The alleged fraud was revealed through corrective disclosures on February 26, 2026, causing a significant stock decline of 10.8%.

Q: What specific misstatements does the VITL lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Vital Farms made materially false or misleading statements regarding the progress and impact of its ERP system implementation, failing to disclose that the transition caused production slowdowns, shipment delays, and the loss of critical retail shelf space. When the true state was revealed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What do VITL 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 VITL 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 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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP reminds purchasers of ChowChow Cloud International Holdings Limited (NYSE American: CHOW) securities of a pending securities class action. THE CASE: A class action seeks to recover damages for investors who purchased CHOW securities between September 16, 2025, and December 10, 2025. YOUR OPTIONS: You may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out-of-pocket fees. Find out if you qualify to recover your per-share losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

From a closing price of $11.70 on December 9, 2025, CHOW shares collapsed to $1.83 on December 10, 2025, a loss of $9.87 per share representing an 84.3% decline. The last day to move for lead plaintiff is May 12, 2026.

The December 10 After-Hours Repricing Event

On December 10, 2025, NYSE American halted trading in CHOW ordinary shares twice due to volatility stemming from what investigations and public reports revealed was a coordinated market manipulation and pump-and-dump promotional scheme. The lawsuit maintains that once the artificial buying pressure generated by fraudulent stock promoters was interrupted by the exchange halts, the market rapidly stripped away the inflation that had been embedded in CHOW’s share price since its September 16, 2025, IPO.

Alleged Investor Damages and Loss Causation

The securities action asserts that CHOW shares traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period because defendants failed to disclose that the Company’s stock was being driven by a fraudulent promotion scheme rather than legitimate investor demand:

• CHOW priced its IPO at $4.00 per share on September 16, 2025, and shares surged to an intraday high of $21.91 on the first trading day on volume of 1.4 million shares
• Repeated surges in trading volume occurred in the absence of any material news, filings, or fundamental changes from the Company
• On October 29, 2025, shares reached $9.90 at close on volume that represented a twenty-one-fold increase over prior weeks, with no corporate catalyst
• The December 10, 2025, exchange halts and subsequent 84.3% single-day decline quantify the artificial inflation that had been embedded in the stock price

What the December 10 Disclosure Revealed

Plaintiffs assert that the dual trading halts by NYSE American on December 10 constituted a corrective event that removed artificial inflation from CHOW’s share price. The filing states that impersonators posing as financial advisors had used social media, WhatsApp groups, and fabricated memoranda to create a buying frenzy among retail investors, promising returns of “120%-150%.” When exchange intervention disrupted the scheme, shares repriced to reflect actual fundamentals.

Join the CHOW recovery action or call Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at (212) 363-7500.

“When companies fail to disclose material information, shareholders may suffer significant losses. The magnitude of the single-day decline in CHOW shares on December 10 reflects the extent to which the market had been pricing in demand that was allegedly manufactured rather than organic.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

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.

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, May 04, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — “Maximize shareholder value.” That was the promise United Homes Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: UHG) made on May 19, 2025. Nine months later, the reality arrived: a $1.18 per share cash-out representing a 73% collapse from the Class Period high. Find out if you qualify to recover losses from UHG’s broken promise or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

UHG shares traded at $4.26 on October 17, 2025. By February 23, 2026, the announced merger price valued every share at just $1.18, a loss of $3.08 per share. The lead plaintiff deadline is June 9, 2026.

The Promise

On May 19, 2025, UHG announced its Board had appointed a Special Committee of independent directors to review strategic alternatives “in order to explore ways to maximize shareholder value.” The Company’s founder and controlling stockholder stated the Company was “committed to maximizing value for all of our shareholders.” Management projected optimism about cost efficiency improvements and new community openings that would “have a more significant impact on our results as we head into the second half of the year,” the lawsuit contends.

The Reality

The complaint alleges the Company’s controlling stockholder, holding 79% of the voting power, was simultaneously taking actions to devalue the Company and force a sale on his terms. When independent directors attempted to empower management and demanded the controlling stockholder step aside, he refused. Six of seven board members resigned. The Company then faced pressure from auditors, lenders, land banking partners, and insurers over corporate governance failures.

The Numbers: Promised vs. Actual

• Promise: Strategic review to “maximize shareholder value” across a range of alternatives including sale, asset sales, and refinancing Actual: All-cash merger at $1.18 per share, an enterprise value of approximately $221 million
• Promise: Adjusted book value of $96.9 million and total stockholders’ equity of $82.2 million as of Q2 2025 Actual: Cash-out price representing more than a 50% discount to the stock’s closing price the day before the merger announcement
• Promise: Operational progress and improving results expected in the second half of 2025 Actual: Home closings fell 29% year over year and revenue declined 23% in Q3 2025
• Promise: Independent board oversight of the strategic process Actual: Six of seven directors resigned after the controlling stockholder refused to yield authority

What the Lawsuit Alleges About the Gap

As pleaded, the controlling stockholder leveraged his 79% voting interest to block the board’s conditions, triggered a mass resignation, destabilized Company operations, and ultimately forced a sale at a fraction of the Company’s prior trading value. The action contends investors were told the strategic review would maximize their investment’s worth while, behind the scenes, the opposite was occurring.

“Companies that make specific promises to investors about future performance have an obligation to disclose known risks to those projections. The gap between what UHG investors were promised and what they received raises serious questions about whether the strategic review was ever designed to benefit public shareholders.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Speak with an attorney about recovering your UHG investment losses
or call (212) 363-7500.

LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: June 9, 2026

About Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is a nationally recognized shareholder rights firm. Over the past 20 years, the firm has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Ranked in ISS Top 50 for seven consecutive years.

Frequently Asked Questions About the UHG Lawsuit

Q: What specific misstatements does the UHG lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges United Homes Group made materially false or misleading statements regarding the strategic review process and the controlling stockholder’s true intentions during the Class Period. When the true state of affairs was revealed through a series of disclosures, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: How much did UHG stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately $2.23 (52.46%) on October 20, 2025, followed by additional drops of $0.11 (7.6%) and $1.23 (51.68%) on November 6, 2025, and February 23, 2026, respectively. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period at artificially inflated prices may be entitled to compensation.

Q: What do UHG 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 UHG 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: 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 June 9, 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