Market Newsdesk

MCLEAN, Va., June 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — TEGNA Inc. today announced that its stations received 50 Regional Edward R. Murrow Awards, including the top honor for Overall Excellence awarded to KGW in Portland, Oregon. KARE in Minneapolis, earned nine awards, including Excellence in Writing, and KUSA in Denver was recognized with six awards including Investigative Reporting.

“These honors reflect a sustained dedication to serving our communities with courageous reporting, distinctive writing and trustworthy coverage distributed across platforms,” said Julie Wolfe, vice president of content at TEGNA. “Congratulations to our talented news teams, who continue to set a high standard for local journalism across the country.”

Overall, 16 TEGNA stations were honored:

• KARE – Minneapolis, Minn., 9 awards
• KING – Seattle, Wash., 7 awards
• KUSA – Denver, Colo., 6 awards
• WFAA – Dallas, Texas, 5 awards
• WTHR – Indianapolis, Ind., 5 awards
• KGW – Portland, Ore., 3 awards, including Overall Excellence
• WCSH/WLBZ (NEWS CENTER Maine) – Portland, Maine, 3 awards
• WTSP – Tampa, Fla., 2 awards
• KHOU – Houston, Texas, 2 awards
• KREM – Spokane, Wash., 2 awards
• KSDK – St. Louis, Mo., 1 award
• KXTV – Sacramento, Cal., 1 award
• WUSA – Washington, D.C., 1 award
• WBIR – Knoxville, Tenn., 1 award
• WGRZ – Buffalo, N.Y., 1 award
• WTOL – Toledo, Ohio, 1 award

The Edward R. Murrow Awards are sponsored by the Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA) and honor outstanding achievements in broadcast and digital journalism.

About TEGNA

TEGNA Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nexstar Media Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: NXST), operating independently of Nexstar consistent with the “Hold Separate Order” issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on April 17, 2026. TEGNA is a multiplatform media company operating 64 local television stations in 51 U.S. markets, and hundreds of websites, mobile and Connected TV (CTV) apps, and Premion, a leading Connected TV and Over-the-Top (OTT) advertising platform.

For media inquiries, contact:

Molly McMahon
Senior Director, Corporate Communications
703-873-6422
[email protected]

NEW YORK, June 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP examines the adequacy of Zoetis Inc.’s (NYSE: ZTS) risk disclosures in connection with a securities class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased securities between January 14, 2025 and May 6, 2026. Find out if you qualify to recover losses from inadequate disclosures. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

Zoetis shares fell from a pre-revelatory share price of $151.81 to $87.31 following four corrective disclosures between August 2025 and May 2026 revealed that specific, concrete risks the Company allegedly already knew about had never been adequately communicated to investors. The lead plaintiff deadline is July 27, 2026.

What the Company Disclosed

Zoetis’ SEC filings contained standard risk factor language acknowledging that competition could affect product sales and that regulatory actions could impact marketed products. The Company also disclosed the FDA’s December 2024 “Dear Veterinarian” letter in general terms and referenced a subsequent label update for Librela warning of neurological and mobility-related events.

However, the complaint challenges whether these disclosures told investors what Zoetis actually knew. According to the action, the Company’s boilerplate risk factors described theoretical possibilities while management was allegedly confronting real, measurable erosion across three product franchises simultaneously.

What the Complaint Alleges Was Missing

The securities action contends that Zoetis’ disclosures omitted critical specifics:

• Veterinarian prescription intent for Librela was declining materially following FDA safety warnings about seizures, paresis, and death in treated dogs, yet management publicly claimed satisfaction levels remained “very strong”
• Simparica Trio was experiencing concrete market share losses to Elanco’s lower-priced Credelio Quattro, which offered broader parasite coverage, while management claimed Trio had “not experienced year-over-year patient share loss”
• Apoquel and Cytopoint were losing substantial share to Elanco’s Zenrelia, marketed as comparable or superior at a lower price point, while management insisted competitors achieved only “very limited impact”
• Declining patient volume in veterinary clinics was amplifying share losses in dermatology, a trend management did not acknowledge until May 2026

Regulatory Reality

The FDA’s December 2024 letter described severe adverse neurological events including seizures and deaths in dogs treated with Librela. Rather than disclosing how this letter was concretely affecting veterinarian prescribing behavior, the complaint alleges management characterized the letter as “terribly helpful” and claimed it was “consistent with what we’ve been telling them.” As alleged, management’s public characterization contradicted what was actually happening at the clinic level.

Why Generic Warnings May Not Protect

The complaint challenges the adequacy of Zoetis’ risk disclosures on the basis that generic language about potential competition and regulatory risk cannot substitute for disclosing known, specific problems already eroding sales performance. The action maintains that when management possessed concrete evidence of weakening veterinarian adoption, accelerating market share losses, and declining patient volume, continuing to issue reassuring public statements while relying on boilerplate risk factors was materially misleading.

“Generic risk factor language cannot substitute for disclosing specific, known problems that are already affecting a company’s operations. The complaint raises important questions about whether Zoetis’ disclosures gave investors an accurate picture of the challenges management was already confronting,” stated Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: July 27, 2026

Speak with an attorney about whether Zoetis’ disclosures were adequate or call (212) 363-7500.

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 ZTS Lawsuit

Q: When did Zoetis allegedly mislead investors? A: The class period runs from January 14, 2025 to May 6, 2026. During this time, the complaint alleges Zoetis made materially false or misleading statements about the strength of its Companion Animal product portfolio while concealing safety concerns, competitive losses, and declining veterinarian confidence.

Q: What specific misstatements does the ZTS lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Zoetis made materially false or misleading statements regarding the competitive strength, veterinarian adoption, and growth sustainability of its flagship Companion Animal products, including Librela, Simparica Trio, Apoquel, and Cytopoint. When the true state of these products was revealed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What do ZTS 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 ZTS 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 July 27, 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, June 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Investors holding Verra Mobility Corporation (NASDAQ: VRRM) shares watched up to 46% of their investment disappear on May 26, 2026, after the Company cut its FY-2026 revenue guidance by $135 million to $145 million following the termination of a major customer contract. Shareholders who lost money on VRRM are encouraged to submit their information to Levi & Korsinsky. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. via email at [email protected] or by telephone at (212) 363-7500.

On May 6, 2026, CFO Craig Conti reaffirmed all FY-2026 guidance measures, including total revenue in the range of $1.02 billion to $1.03 billion. On the same call, CEO David Roberts described negotiations with a customer representing over 10% of revenue as “ongoing and constructive.” Twenty days later, on May 26, 2026, the Company disclosed that the customer had terminated its contract and revised revenue guidance downward to a range of $985 million to $995 million — a reduction of approximately 13% from the midpoint of prior guidance.

The market reaction was immediate, with VRRM shares fell approximately 45-46% on May 26, 2026. The gap between the reaffirmed guidance on May 6 and the revised figures disclosed May 26 represented up to $145 million in revenue the Company had told investors to expect less than three weeks earlier.

If you purchased Verra Mobility shares and suffered a loss, click here to discuss your legal rights with Levi & Korsinsky. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. via email at [email protected] or by telephone at (212) 363-7500.

ABOUT THE FIRM — For over two decades, Levi & Korsinsky has represented shareholders in securities investigations and litigation. Ranked in ISS Top 50 for seven consecutive years.

Frequently Asked Questions About the VRRM Investigation

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

Q: How much did VRRM stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 45-46% on May 26, 2026, after the Company disclosed the termination of a major customer contract and slashed full-year revenue guidance by up to $145 million.

Q: Which statements are being investigated as potentially misleading? A: The investigation concerns whether Verra Mobility made materially false or misleading statements regarding the status of a major customer contract renewal and the reliability of its full-year revenue guidance. When the true state was revealed, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: What do VRRM 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 to participate in the investigation.

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

Q: What if I already sold my VRRM 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 VRRM and sold at a loss may still participate in the investigation.

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

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, June 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP reminds purchasers of Commvault Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: CVLT) securities of a pending securities class action.

THE CASE: A class action seeks to recover damages for investors who purchased Commvault securities between April 29, 2025, and January 26, 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.

Commvault shares fell $40.23 per share in a single trading session, a decline exceeding 31%, after the Company reported net new ARR of just $39 million against a $45 million target. Investors have until July 17, 2026, to seek lead plaintiff status.

How a Data Protection Company Generates Recurring Revenue

A subscription software business depends on converting new customer contracts into predictable annual recurring revenue. At Commvault, ARR is calculated by dividing total contract value by contract duration. This formula means that the composition of sales, specifically whether a customer purchases a SaaS subscription or a term software license, directly determines how much ARR each deal contributes. SaaS customers land at average selling prices two to three times lower than term license customers, the lawsuit contends. Longer-duration term deals further dilute ARR by spreading total contract value across more years.

Sales Linearity and the Quarter-End Compression Problem

The filing states that over 60% of Commvault’s deals closed in the final weeks of the third fiscal quarter of 2026. This back-loaded sales pattern allegedly made it impossible for management to accurately forecast net new ARR composition when it raised guidance to $45 million. As set forth in the complaint, this extreme concentration of deal closings at quarter-end meant that the product mix between SaaS and term licenses was uncertain until the very last days of the reporting period, yet management had already committed to elevated ARR targets without accounting for this variability.

Alleged Product Mix Impact by the Numbers

• 70% of Q3 2026 net new ARR allegedly came from SaaS deals, up from 61% the prior quarter
• SaaS customers land at ASPs two to three times smaller than term software license customers
• New logo term license deals carried longer durations of approximately three to four years versus one to two years for cross-sell deals, further compressing ARR per contract
• Management raised net new ARR guidance from $40 million to $45 million in October 2025 despite these known compositional dynamics
• The actual $39 million result fell short of even the original $40 million baseline
• Price concessions of approximately 2% to 5% on longer-duration new logo term deals added additional downward pressure on reported ARR

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

“The complaint raises serious questions about whether investors received accurate information about how deal composition and sales timing would affect the Company’s ability to meet its own ARR targets,” stated Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

The action contends that management possessed internal data on pipeline composition and deal-closing patterns that would have revealed the $45 million target was unrealistic given the accelerating SaaS mix shift. Despite this, guidance was raised rather than tempered, allegedly inflating Commvault’s stock price throughout the Class Period.

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 CVLT Lawsuit

Q: Who is eligible to join the CVLT investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased CVLT stock or securities between April 29, 2025, and January 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: How much did CVLT stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 31%, a decline of $40.23 per share, after the Company disclosed that Q3 2026 net new ARR of $39 million missed the $45 million guidance. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period at artificially inflated prices may be entitled to compensation.

Q: What is the CVLT lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment is July 17, 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 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 CVLT 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: 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 if I already sold my CVLT 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.

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, June 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP notifies investors in FS KKR Capital Corp. (NYSE: FSK) that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased securities between May 8, 2024 and February 25, 2026. Find out if you qualify to recover losses. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

The combined fair value decline across Q2 and Q4 2025 totaled approximately $880 million. FSK shares fell $2.03 per share, or 15.24%, on February 26, 2026, following the final corrective disclosure.

The private credit market has attracted billions in institutional capital from investors seeking stable income through Business Development Companies. FS KKR Capital Corp. (NYSE: FSK) reported $14.2 billion in total investment fair value at the start of the Class Period, but the portfolio’s reported health allegedly masked a deepening credit deterioration that would ultimately erase $880 million in fair value across just two quarters.

How Inflated Portfolio Valuations Allegedly Harmed Shareholders

A BDC’s net asset value is the single most important metric investors use to assess portfolio health. The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, FS KKR Capital overstated the fair value of its investment portfolio while claiming its valuation process was operating effectively. According to the lawsuit, the Company represented quarter after quarter that its board oversaw a rigorous fair valuation process under Rule 2a-5 of the 1940 Act, while portfolio companies were deteriorating beneath reported figures.

The complaint contends the Company’s NAV declined from $24.32 per share in March 2024 to $20.89 by December 2025, a cumulative erosion of $3.43 per share, or 14.1%, that accelerated sharply once the true condition of legacy investments was revealed.

Key Portfolio Valuation Allegations for Shareholders

• The Company allegedly overstated the effectiveness of its fair value determination process while non-accrual investments were building beneath reported figures
• Total fair value of investments fell $474 million in Q2 2025 and another $406 million in Q4 2025
• The Company’s Chief Investment Officer was forced to acknowledge the non-accrual rate exceeded the BDC industry average only after cumulative losses had already materialized

The Alleged Valuation Methodology Failure

The lawsuit asserts that FS KKR Capital’s SEC filings described a valuation framework relying on dealer quotes, portfolio company financials, comparable public company analysis, and independent third-party pricing services. The action claims these representations gave investors false confidence in reported NAV figures while the underlying portfolio was experiencing accelerating credit stress that the disclosed valuation procedures should have captured earlier.

The Company’s own risk factor disclosures acknowledged that fair value determinations “may cause our net asset value on a given date to materially understate or overstate the value,” yet the lawsuit contends management simultaneously certified that disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting were effective each quarter.

“This case presents important questions about portfolio valuation disclosure obligations in the private credit sector. When a BDC reports declining non-accrual rates for five consecutive quarters and then reverses course dramatically, investors deserve to understand whether reported valuations reflected the true condition of the underlying portfolio.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Submit your information to join this case or call 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. Applications to serve as lead plaintiff must be filed by July 6, 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions About the FSK Lawsuit

Q: What is the FSK class action lawsuit about? A: A securities class action has been filed against FS KKR Capital Corp. (NYSE: FSK) alleging materially false and misleading statements between May 8, 2024 and February 25, 2026. Shares fell approximately 15.24% after the truth was revealed on February 26, 2026, causing significant losses for shareholders.

Q: Who is eligible to join the FSK investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased FSK stock or securities between May 8, 2024 and February 25, 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 do FSK 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 FSK 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

Smith+Nephew (LSE:SN, NYSE:SNN), the global medical technology company, announces the US launch of next generation LEAF^♢Patient Monitoring System, a data-driven pressure injury prevention platform designed to help health care providers tackle the growing burden of hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) by strengthening protocols and outcomes. The LEAF System uses a wearable sensor to monitor patient mobility and provide real-time turn status updates, helping to improve workflow efficiency, turn quality, and protocol adherence.^1-3

Every year, approximately 60,000 annual deaths in the US are attributed to HAPIs,⁴ placing a $26.8B annual burden on the nationwide economy.⁵ For individual hospitals, that can mean millions of extra dollars spent on extended lengths of stay and patient readmissions. Staff shortages, workload pressures, and limited data access all contribute to protocol inconsistencies, while clinicians face growing pressure to improve patient safety and control costs, without compromising outcomes.

Positioned at the forefront of HAPI prevention, LEAF Next Generation is a cloud-hosted solution which features a redesigned and enhanced user interface. Designed in consultation with multidisciplinary nursing teams, LEAF Next Generation helps to ensure that at-risk patients get the necessary care at the appropriate time, with improved turn quality and protocol adherence.^1-3 The system seamlessly integrates with hospital electronic medical records (EMRs), helping nurses to adhere to turning protocols using real time data and reporting that quickly identifies at-risk patients. Hosted securely on Smith+Nephew’s cloud, with access via any hospital-approved device, clinicians are able to focus on patient care rather than system maintenance.

The system’s user interface enables intuitive workflow navigation with document automation which allows nurses to quickly access critical information and streamline patient management. Interdisciplinary teams benefit from instant access to patient-level insights, alongside a hospital-wide view to assess performance over time. This helps to ensure continuous delivery of high-quality care is maintained at all times.⁶

The LEAF system has already transformed HAPI prevention, turning evidence into action compared to the standard of care. Each year, it monitors over 150,000 patients,⁶ reducing the odds of HAPIs by up to 73%² and delivering up to $1.8 million in estimated savings in just one critical care facility.^7,8

Rohit Kashyap, President of Advanced Wound Management at Smith+Nephew said “The LEAF Patient Monitoring System has truly revolutionized how we think about pressure injury prevention. Scalability, interoperability, and ease of use are key to driving adoption and establishing a new standard of care in patient turning and repositioning. Backed by proven outcomes for both clinicians and patients, The LEAF System is already shaping what’s possible in pressure injury prevention protocols.“

The next generation of the LEAF Patient Monitoring System is now commercially available in the US as we support healthcare providers and patients in reducing the burden of HAPIs.

To learn more about LEAF Next Generation, please click Homepage | LEAF System

References:

1. Larson B, Pihulic M, Luu N, Cooley A. Impact of turn compliance on probability of hospital-aquired pressure injuries: A multi-centre analysis. Poster presented at: The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Biennial Conference; March 10- March 11, 2017; New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
2. Pickham D, Berte N, Pihulic M, et al. Effect of a wearable patient sensor on care delivery for preventing pressure injuries in acutely ill adults: A pragmatic randomized clinical trial (LS-HAPI study). Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;80:12-19.
3. Schutt SC, Tarver C, Pezzani M. Pilot study: Assessing the effect of continual position monitoring technology on compliance with patient turning protocols. Nurs Open. 2018;5(1):21-28.
4. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality website. Preventing pressure ulcers in hospitals: a toolkit for improving quality of care. https://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/systems/hospital/pressureulcertoolkit/putool1.html. Updated October 2014. Accessed February 1, 2018.​
5. Padula W V., & Delarmente, B. A. (2019). The national cost of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in the United States. Wound Repair and Regeneration, 27(3), 329–335 WV, Delarmente BA. The national cost of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in the United States. Int Wound J. 2019;16(3):634-640.
6. Klaeb M, Krafft K, Walters B, Lowe J, Cooley A. The Influence of Wearable Technology on Nursing Attitudes and Adherence to Patient Turning and Repositioning. Poster presented at: Patient Handling and Mobility Annual Conference; March 5- March 7, 2019; Orlando, Florida, USA. Note: in intensive care units. 
7. Smith+Nephew 2020.Leveraging novel technology to decrease hospital-acquired pressure injuries. Internal Report. EO.AWM.PCS006.001.v1.
8. Gasparini R, Derisma Q, Hannon R. “Turning” to Technology: Reducing Hospital Acquired Pressure Injuries in Critical Care with Visual Turn Cueing. Poster presented at: National Pressure Injury Advisory Pannel Annual Conference; March 10- March 12, 2021; Virtual Conference.

Enquiries

Frida Wilhelmsson        +46 (738) 499 429
Smith+Nephew            [email protected]

About Smith+Nephew

Smith+Nephew is a portfolio medical technology business focused on the repair, regeneration and replacement of soft and hard tissue. We exist to restore people’s bodies and their self-belief by using technology to take the limits off living. We call this purpose ‘Life Unlimited’. Our 17,000 employees deliver this mission every day, making a difference to patients’ lives through the excellence of our product portfolio, and the invention and application of new technologies across our three global business units of Orthopaedics, Sports Medicine & ENT and Advanced Wound Management.
Founded in Hull, UK, in 1856, we now operate in around 100 countries, and generated annual sales of $6.2 billion in 2025. Smith+Nephew is a constituent of the FTSE100 (LSE:SN, NYSE:SNN). The terms ‘Group’ and ‘Smith+Nephew’ are used to refer to Smith & Nephew plc and its consolidated subsidiaries, unless the context requires otherwise.

For more information about Smith+Nephew, please visit www.smith-nephew.com and follow us on X, LinkedIn, Instagram or Facebook.

Forward-looking Statements

This document may contain forward-looking statements that may or may not prove accurate. For example, statements regarding expected revenue growth and trading profit margins, market trends and our product pipeline are forward-looking statements. Phrases such as “aim”, “plan”, “intend”, “anticipate”, “well-placed”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “target”, “consider” and similar expressions are generally intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from what is expressed or implied by the statements. For Smith+Nephew, these factors include: conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, economic and financial conditions in the markets we serve, especially those affecting healthcare providers, payers and customers; price levels for established and innovative medical devices; developments in medical technology; regulatory approvals, reimbursement decisions or other government actions; product defects or recalls or other problems with quality management systems or failure to comply with related regulations; litigation relating to patent or other claims; legal and financial compliance risks and related investigative, remedial or enforcement actions; disruption to our supply chain or operations or those of our suppliers; competition for qualified personnel; strategic actions, including acquisitions and disposals, our success in performing due diligence, valuing and integrating acquired businesses; disruption that may result from transactions or other changes we make in our business plans or organisation to adapt to market developments; relationships with healthcare professionals; reliance on information technology and cybersecurity; disruptions due to natural disasters, weather and climate change related events; changes in customer and other stakeholder sustainability expectations; changes in taxation regulations; effects of foreign exchange volatility; and numerous other matters that affect us or our markets, including those of a political, economic, business, competitive or reputational nature. Please refer to the documents that Smith+Nephew has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including Smith+Nephew’s most recent annual report on Form 20-F, which is available on the SEC’s website at www. sec.gov, for a discussion of certain of these factors. Any forward-looking statement is based on information available to Smith+Nephew as of the date of the statement. All written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to Smith+Nephew are qualified by this caution. Smith+Nephew does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect any change in circumstances or in Smith+Nephew’s expectations.
◊ Trademark of Smith+Nephew. Certain marks registered in US Patent and Trademark Office.

NEW YORK, June 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP reminds purchasers of Veritone, Inc. (NASDAQ: VERI) securities of a pending securities class action.

THE CASE: A class action seeks to recover damages for investors who purchased VERI securities between October 14, 2025 and April 14, 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.

VERI shares fell $0.77 per share (29.5%) on March 27, 2026, followed by additional declines of 9.14% and 8.3% on subsequent corrective disclosures. Investors have until July 20, 2026 to seek lead plaintiff status.

How Veritone Allegedly Turned a Software License Into $13 Million in Revenue

An AI software company cannot recognize revenue on a non-monetary exchange simply by assigning its own negotiated price to the deal. Under ASC 606, the transaction must be measured at the fair value of what was actually received or given up. The lawsuit contends Veritone did the opposite: the Company sold an on-premise software license in exchange for certain intangible rights at a negotiated price of $13.0 million, despite the software’s estimated standalone selling price ranging from just $0.4 million to $11.3 million. This gap of up to $12.6 million between the negotiated price and the estimated fair value sits at the heart of the accounting questions that ultimately forced a restatement.

Agent-vs.-Principal Misclassification and Its Alleged Impact

The filing states that Veritone recorded gross revenue and costs on transactions where it acted as an agent rather than a principal. Under ASC 606, an agent recognizes only its net fee as revenue. By booking the full gross amount, the Company allegedly inflated both its revenue line and cost of revenue, creating the appearance of a larger business than the underlying economics supported. The April 14, 2026 Form 8-K confirmed this misclassification affected both the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2025.

Alleged Barter Revenue Impact by the Numbers

• The $2.2 million revenue overstatement from the on-premise software valuation error represented approximately 8% of Q3 2025 reported revenue of $29.1 million
• Accounts receivable were overstated by $0.9 million (approximately 3% of the reported balance)
• Accumulated other comprehensive income was overstated by $1.5 million, a 246% overstatement of the reported figure
• Additional billing and recognition errors added approximately $0.2 million in further Q3 revenue overstatement
• Cost of revenue misstatements included a $0.4 million overstatement for the nine-month period
• Royalties payable were overstated by $0.7 million, classified within accrued expenses

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

“The complaint raises serious questions about whether investors received accurate information about revenue derived from non-standard transactions that required careful accounting judgment under ASC 606.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

About Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

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

Frequently Asked Questions About the VERI Lawsuit

Q: What specific misstatements does the VERI lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Veritone made materially false or misleading statements regarding its revenue recognition practices, internal controls, and financial results during the class period. When the true state of its accounting was revealed through three successive corrective disclosures, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: How much did VERI stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 29.5% — a decline of $0.77 per share — after the Company first disclosed it was finalizing accounting determinations for certain revenue transactions under ASC 606. Additional declines of 9.14% and 8.3% followed on subsequent disclosures regarding restatement and unreliable financial statements.

Q: What do VERI 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 VERI 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 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.

Q: Has Levi & Korsinsky handled similar cases before? A: Yes, including securities class actions involving revenue inflation, earnings guidance fraud, dividend misrepresentation, and executive misconduct across numerous industries.

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, June 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Institutional investors holding positions in Upstart Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: UPST) during the period May 14, 2025 through November 4, 2025 may wish to evaluate lead plaintiff opportunities in a pending securities class action. Request an institutional investor loss assessment. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

Shares declined $4.49 per share, or 9.71%, closing at $41.75 on November 5, 2025, after Upstart revealed its flagship AI underwriting model had been suppressing loan approvals and conversion rates throughout Q3 2025. The Company simultaneously cut FY 2025 fee revenue guidance by $44 million, from $990 million to $946 million. The window to apply for lead plaintiff closes on June 8, 2026.

Notice to Institutional Holders

Pension funds, endowments, mutual funds, and other fiduciaries that held UPST shares during the Class Period face a distinct set of considerations. A fiduciary that purchased shares while the Company’s AI model performance was allegedly overstated may have acquired those shares at artificially inflated prices. Evaluating potential recovery is consistent with the duty of prudence owed to plan participants and beneficiaries.

ERISA and Fiduciary Considerations

Institutional holders should be aware that failing to evaluate participation in a securities recovery may itself raise fiduciary questions. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act gives preference to institutional investors with large losses when selecting lead plaintiffs, providing direct oversight of litigation strategy, settlement negotiations, and counsel selection.

Fiduciary Obligations and Recovery Options

• Institutional purchasers of UPST securities between May 14, 2025 and November 4, 2025 may recover damages attributable to allegedly inflated share prices
• Lead plaintiff appointment gives fiduciaries direct control over case strategy and settlement terms on behalf of the class
• The PSLRA’s rebuttable presumption favors institutional applicants with the largest financial interest in the relief sought
• No out-of-pocket costs are required; securities class actions proceed on a contingency basis
• Portfolio managers can request a confidential loss analysis to quantify exposure before deciding whether to seek lead plaintiff status
• Participation does not require court appearances or testimony from institutional representatives in the vast majority of cases

Contact us for institutional recovery options or call (212) 363-7500.

Portfolio Impact Assessment

The lawsuit contends that throughout the Class Period, Upstart’s officers promoted Model 22 as a breakthrough that was driving higher approval rates and accelerating revenue growth, while allegedly failing to disclose the model’s tendency to overreact to macroeconomic signals. Upstart raised its FY 2025 revenue guidance to $1.055 billion in August 2025, only to cut it to $1.035 billion three months later when the model’s conservatism could no longer be concealed.

“Institutional investors play a critical role in securities class actions. Their participation ensures that the class is represented by sophisticated parties with meaningful financial stakes and the resources to oversee complex litigation effectively.” — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Case Summary

The action asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of all purchasers of Upstart securities during the Class Period who suffered losses when corrective disclosures revealed alleged deficiencies in the Company’s AI underwriting model.

ABOUT LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP provides sophisticated counsel to institutional investors evaluating lead plaintiff opportunities. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars. Ranked among ISS Top 50 for seven consecutive years.

Frequently Asked Questions About the UPST Lawsuit

Q: Who is eligible to join the UPST investor lawsuit? A: Investors who purchased UPST stock or securities between May 14, 2025 and November 4, 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: What is the UPST lead plaintiff deadline? A: The deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment is June 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.

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

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

Q: Why should investors choose Levi & Korsinsky? A: Ranked among top securities litigation firms by ISS for seven consecutive years. Recovered hundreds of millions for shareholders with extensive federal court experience.

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