{"id":1000402,"date":"2026-09-03T12:30:35","date_gmt":"2026-09-03T16:30:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.marketnewsdesk.com\/index.php\/be-shareholder-alert-september-28-2026-lead-plaintiff-deadline-in-bloom-energy-corporation-securities-class-action-contact-suewallst\/"},"modified":"2026-09-03T12:30:35","modified_gmt":"2026-09-03T16:30:35","slug":"be-shareholder-alert-september-28-2026-lead-plaintiff-deadline-in-bloom-energy-corporation-securities-class-action-contact-suewallst","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.marketnewsdesk.com\/index.php\/be-shareholder-alert-september-28-2026-lead-plaintiff-deadline-in-bloom-energy-corporation-securities-class-action-contact-suewallst\/","title":{"rendered":"BE Shareholder Alert: September 28, 2026 Lead Plaintiff Deadline in Bloom Energy Corporation Securities Class Action – Contact SueWallSt"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

PR Newswire<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\n Bloom Energy allegedly<\/span> understated its exposure to Chinese export controls and U.S. tariffs by misrepresenting where its critical raw materials and components actually originated, according to a securities class action.<\/i>\n <\/p>\n

\n NEW YORK<\/span>, Sept. 3, 2026<\/span> \/PRNewswire\/ — SueWallSt alerts investors in Bloom Energy Corporation (NYSE: BE) of a pending securities class action. Class Period: February 27, 2025 through July 8, 2026. Check if you might be eligible to recover your investment losses<\/a>\u00a0or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at jlevi@SueWallSt.com<\/a>\u00a0| (888) SueWallSt.<\/p>\n

\n

\n \"SueWallSt.com\"\n <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

BE INVESTOR ALERT<\/p>\n

BE shares fell $15.28 per share, or 5.7%, to close at $254.29 on July 8, 2026, on unusually heavy volume. The Court has set September 28, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.<\/p>\n

\n The Alleged<\/span> Rare Earth Sourcing Concentration<\/b>\n <\/p>\n

The lawsuit asserts that management told the market the Company’s supply chain “is not dependent on China,” while allegedly<\/span> obtaining scandium-bearing materials through intermediaries in Thailand, Japan, and South Korea, plus direct shipments to its Delaware facility. As alleged<\/span>, that structure left the Company far more exposed to Beijing’s rare earth export controls and to U.S. tariff policy than disclosed.<\/p>\n

\n What Management Allegedly<\/span> Knew<\/b>\n <\/p>\n

The Company guided to 29% margins for the year and later told investors it expected tariffs to reduce fiscal 2025 gross margin by approximately one percent. The action claims those tariff and margin representations rested on a sourcing picture that allegedly<\/span> understated Chinese origin, making the stated impact estimates potentially unreliable.<\/p>\n

\n Trade Policy Trends in Supply Chain Disclosure<\/b>\n <\/p>\n