MONDAY DEADLINE: Varonis Systems, Inc. Investors with Significant Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action – RGRD Law

SAN DIEGO, March 07, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers or acquirers of Varonis Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: VRNS) common stock between February 4, 2025 and October 28, 2025, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), have until Monday, March 9, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Varonis class action lawsuit. Captioned Molchanov v. Varonis Systems, Inc., No. 26-cv-00117 (S.D.N.Y.), the Varonis class action lawsuit charges Varonis as well as certain of Varonis’ executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the

Varonis

class action lawsuit, please provide your information here:


https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-varonis-systems-inc-class-action-lawsuit-vrns.html

You can also contact attorney

J.C. Sanchez

of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at

[email protected]

.

CASE ALLEGATIONS: Varonis provides software products and services.

The Varonis class action lawsuit alleges that defendants created the false impression that they possessed reliable information pertaining to Varonis’ projected revenue outlook and anticipated growth while also minimizing risk from seasonality and macroeconomic fluctuations. The complaint alleges that in truth, Varonis’ optimistic reports of growth, cost cutting measures, and overall effectiveness of its sales team to continue to convince existing clientele to convert to its SaaS offering fell short of reality; Varonis was simply ill-equipped to continue its annual recurring revenue growth trajectory without maintaining a significantly high rate of quarterly conversions.

The Varonis class action lawsuit further alleges that on October 28, 2025, Varonis released its third quarter results that came in well below their previous projections and resultantly lowered their full-year guidance. Varonis’ CEO, defendant Yakov Faitelson, allegedly elaborated on the reasons for the shortfall, attributing it to the “final weeks of the quarter” where Varonis “experienced lower renewals in the Federal vertical and in our non-Federal on-prem subscription business, which led to a shortfall relative to our expectations.” On this news, the price of Varonis stock fell nearly 49%, according to the complaint.

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Varonis common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Varonis class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the Varonis investor class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Varonis shareholder class action lawsuit. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Varonis class action lawsuit.

ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world’s leading complex class action firms representing plaintiffs in securities fraud and shareholder rights litigation. Our Firm ranked #1 on the most recent ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report, recovering more than $916 million for investors in 2025. This marks our fourth #1 ranking in the past five years. And in those five years alone, Robbins Geller recovered $8.4 billion for investors – $3.4 billion more than any other law firm. With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs’ firms in the world, and the Firm’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Please visit the following page for more information:


https://www.rgrdlaw.com/services-litigation-securities-fraud.html

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Services may be performed by attorneys in any of our offices. 

Contact:
        Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
        J.C. Sanchez
        655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101
        800-449-4900
        [email protected]



Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Investor Class Action – RGRD Law

SAN DIEGO, March 07, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces purchasers or acquirers of Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc. (NASDAQ: RARE) common stock between August 3, 2023 and December 26, 2025, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), have until Monday, April 6, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Ultragenyx class action lawsuit. Captioned Bailey v. Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc., No. 26-cv-01097 (N.D. Cal.), the Ultragenyx class action lawsuit charges Ultragenyx as well as certain of Ultragenyx’ top executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the

Ultragenyx

class action lawsuit, please provide your information here:


https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-ultragenyx-pharmaceutical-inc-class-action-lawsuit-rare.html

You can also contact attorney

J.C. Sanchez

of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at

[email protected]

.

CASE ALLEGATIONS: Ultragenyx is a biopharmaceutical company that focuses on the identification, acquisition, development, and commercialization of novel products for the treatment of rare and ultra-rare genetic diseases.

The Ultragenyx class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) defendants created the false impression that they possessed reliable information pertaining to the effects of setrusumab on patients with variable types of Osteogenesis Imperfecta (“OI”), while also minimizing risk that patients in Ultragenyx’ Phase III Orbit study would fail to achieve a statistically significant reduction in annualized fracture rate (“AFR”), such that the second interim analysis could be performed and presented to the investing public; and (ii) in truth, Ultragenyx’ optimism in the Phase III Orbit study’s results and interim analysis benchmark were misplaced because Ultragenyx failed to convey the risk associated with basing such threshold figures on Phase II results that had no placebo control group for appropriate comparison and thus had not ruled out that the reduction in AFR from that study could merely be triggered by an increased standard of care and the placebo effect of being provided a novel treatment.

The Ultragenyx class action lawsuit further alleges that on July 9, 2025, Ultragenyx revealed that the Phase III Orbit study failed to achieve statistical significance for the second interim analysis and that Phase III Orbit and Cosmic studies would now be “progressing toward final analysis.” On this news, the price of Ultragenyx stock fell more than 25%, according to the complaint.

Then, on December 29, 2025, Ultragenyx announced that both its Phase III Orbit and Cosmic Studies had not “achieved statistical significance against the primary endpoints of reduction in annualized clinical fracture rate compared to placebo or bisphosphonates, respectively.” Ultragenyx allegedly attributed the study failure to a “low fracture rate in the placebo group” of Orbit and a trend that fell shy of statistical significance in Cosmic. On this news, the price of Ultragenyx stock fell more than 42%, according to the complaint.

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Ultragenyx common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Ultragenyx class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the Ultragenyx investor class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Ultragenyx shareholder class action lawsuit. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Ultragenyx class action lawsuit.

ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world’s leading complex class action firms representing plaintiffs in securities fraud and shareholder rights litigation. Our Firm ranked #1 on the most recent ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report, recovering more than $916 million for investors in 2025. This marks our fourth #1 ranking in the past five years. And in those five years alone, Robbins Geller recovered $8.4 billion for investors – $3.4 billion more than any other law firm. With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs’ firms in the world, and the Firm’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Please visit the following page for more information:


https://www.rgrdlaw.com/services-litigation-securities-fraud.html

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. 
Services may be performed by attorneys in any of our offices. 

Contact:
    Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP 
    J.C. Sanchez
    655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101 
    800-449-4900 
    [email protected]



NuScale Power Corporation (SMR) Class Action Lawsuit: Investors Face April 20, 2026, Deadline

Did you buy SMR Class A common stock between May 13, 2025, and November 6, 2025?

Affected NuScale Power Corporation
Investor Summary

  • Who: NuScale Power Corporation (NYSE: SMR)
  • What: Securities fraud class action lawsuit filed
  • Class Period: May 13, 2025, through November 6, 2025
  • Deadline to Seek Lead Plaintiff Status: April 20, 2026
  • Key Lawsuit Allegations: Material misstatements and/or omissions concerning the company’s commercialization strategy for its nuclear power generation projects and development.
  • Investor Action: Contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP (www.ktmc.com) for recovery options at no cost to investor

RADNOR, Pa., March 07, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP (www.ktmc.com), a nationally recognized securities litigation law firm, informs investors that a securities fraud class action lawsuit has been filed against NuScale Power Corporation (NuScale) (NYSE: SMR) on behalf of those who purchased or acquired NuScale Class A common stock between May 13, 2025, and November 6, 2025, inclusive. The lawsuit is filed in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon and is captioned Truedson v. NuScale Power Corporation, et al, Case No. 3:26-cv-00328 (D. Or.).   Investors have until April 20, 2026, to file for lead plaintiff status.  


CONTACT KTMC TO DISCUSS YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS:


If you purchased or acquired NuScale Class A common stock and have lost money on your investment, you are encouraged to contact KTMC attorney Jonathan Naji, Esq. at:

(484) 270-1453
[email protected]
https://www.ktmc.com/smr-nuscale-power-corporation-class-action-lawsuit?utm_source=Globe&utm_medium=pressrelease&utm_campaign=smr&mktm=PR

There is no cost or obligation to speak with an attorney.

Learn more about NuScale Power Corporation on YouTube:


NUSCALE POWER CORPORATION


CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT – COMPLAINT ALLEGATION SUMMARY:


The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) ENTRA1 Energy LLC (“ENTRA1”) had never built, financed, or operated any significant projects– let alone projects in the highly technical and complicated field of nuclear power generation during its entire operating history; (2) NuScale had entrusted its commercialization, distribution, and deployment of its NuScale Power Module and hundreds of millions of dollars of NuScale capital to an entity that lacked any significant prior experience owning, financing, or operating nuclear energy generation facilities; (3) the purported experience and qualifications attributed to ENTRA1 by Defendants during the Class Period in fact referred to the purported experience and qualifications of the principals of the Habboush Group, a distinct entity without significant experience in the field of nuclear power generation; and (4) as a result, NuScale’s commercialization strategy was exposed to material, undisclosed risks of failure, delays, regulatory challenges, or other negative setbacks.

Why did NuScale’s Stock Drop?

On November 6, 2025, NuScale surprised investors by revealing that the company’s general and administrative expenses had ballooned more than 3,000% to $519 million during its third fiscal quarter, up from $17 million in the prior year period, due largely to NuScale’s payment of $495 million to ENTRA1 for its TVA agreement. As a result, NuScale’s quarterly net loss skyrocketed to $532 million, up from $46 million in the prior year period. On this news, the price of NuScale Class A common stock declined by $5.45 per share, or approximately 14.4%, from a close of $37.91 per share on November 5, 2025, to close at $32.46 on November 6, 2025.


WHAT SMR INVESTORS CAN DO NOW:

  1. File to be lead plaintiff by April 20, 2026.
  2. Contact KTMC for a free case evaluation. All representation is on a contingency fee basis, there is no cost to you.
  3. Retain counsel of choice or take no action.


THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS FOR NUSCALE POWER CORPORATION INVESTORS:


NuScale investors may, no later than April 20, 2026, seek to be appointed as a lead plaintiff representative of the class through Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP or other counsel, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of all class members in directing the litigation.  The lead plaintiff is usually the investor or small group of investors who have the largest financial interest and who are also adequate and typical of the proposed class of investors. The lead plaintiff selects counsel to represent the lead plaintiff and the class and these attorneys, if approved by the court, are lead or class counsel. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision of whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff.


Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
encourages NuScale investors to contact the firm for more information.


ABOUT KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP (KTMC):

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP (KTMC) is a leading U.S. plaintiff-side law firm focused on securities-fraud class actions and global investor protection. The firm represents individual investors as well as institutions, such as major pension funds, asset managers, and international investors. KTMC has led some of the largest recoveries in securities litigation and has been recognized by peers and the legal media with numerous accolades, including The National Law Journal’s Plaintiff’s Hot List and Trailblazers in Plaintiffs’ Law, BTI Consulting Group’s Honor Roll of Most Feared Law Firms, The Legal Intelligencer’s Class Action Firm of the Year, Lawdragon’s Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers, and Law360’s Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar. The firm operates globally with offices in Pennsylvania and California.  KTMC has recovered over $25 billion for our clients and the classes they represent.   For more information about Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, please visit www.ktmc.com.   The complaint in this matter was not filed by KTMC.

CONTACT:

Jonathan Naji, Esq.
(484) 270-1453
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
[email protected]
        
May be considered attorney advertising in certain jurisdictions. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.



$ARDT Class Reminder: Ardent Health Investors Reminded of the Monday March 9 Securities Class Action Deadline – Investors with Losses Urged to Contact BFA Law

BFA Law alleges that Ardent Health, Inc. committed securities fraud by misrepresenting its receivables and collection practices and causing a 33% stock drop.

NEW YORK, March 07, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit against Ardent Health, Inc. (NYSE:ARDT) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after a significant stock drop resulting from potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in Ardent Health, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit.

Key Details of the Ardent Health ($ARDT) Class Action:

  • Filing Law Firm: BFA Law
  • Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 9, 2026
  • Alleged Misconduct: Misrepresenting its receivables by delaying recognition of uncollectable accounts and misrepresenting its collection practices
  • Stock Decline: November 13, 2025 – 33% Stock Drop
  • Court: U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
  • Action: Contact BFA Law to discuss your rights

Investors have until March 9, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in Ardent Health securities. The class action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. It is captioned Postiwala v. Ardent Health, Inc., et al., No. 3:26-cv-00022.

Why is Ardent Health Being Sued for Securities Fraud?

Ardent Health and its affiliates operate acute care hospitals and other healthcare facilities. A critical aspect of Ardent Health’s operations is the collection of accounts receivable and the framework by which Ardent Health determines the collectability of such accounts. According to the lawsuit, Ardent Health stated that it employed an active monitoring process to determine the collectability of its accounts receivable, and that this process included “detailed reviews of historical collections” as a “primary source of information.” 

As alleged, in truth, Ardent Health did not primarily rely on “detailed reviews of historical collections” in determining collectability of accounts receivable, but instead “utilized a 180-day cliff at which time an account became fully reserved.” This allowed Ardent Health to report higher amounts of accounts receivable during the Class Period, and delay recognizing losses on uncollectable accounts. The lawsuit alleges that Ardent Health’s purported misrepresentations are a violation of the federal securities laws.      

Why did Ardent Health’s Stock Drop?

On November 12, 2025, after market hours, Ardent Health revealed it had completed “hindsight evaluations of historical collection trends” that resulted in a $43 million decrease in revenue for the quarter. Ardent Health also revealed that it increased its professional liability reserves by $54 million because of “adverse prior period claim developments” resulting from a set of claims between 2019 and 2022 “as well as consideration of broader industry trends.”

This news caused the price of Ardent Health stock to drop $4.75 per share, or more than 33%, from a closing price of $14.05 per share on November 12, 2025, to $9.30 per share on November 13, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in Ardent Health, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis; there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:


https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.


https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/ardent-health-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.



$EOSE Investigation News: Eos Energy Investors Notified of the Ongoing Securities Investigation – Investors with Losses Urged to Contact BFA Law

BFA Law is investigating Eos Energy Enterprises, Inc. after its stock plummeted over 39% due to disappointing 2025 financial results and manufacturing issues, potentially violating federal securities laws.

NEW YORK, March 07, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces an investigation into Eos Energy Enterprises, Inc. (NASDAQ:EOSE) for potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in Eos, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/eos-energy-class-action-lawsuit.

Key Details of the Eos ($EOSE) Class Action Investigation:

  • Investigation Overview: Securities fraud related to Eos’s representations regarding near-term revenue growth and the timing, execution, and feasibility of its manufacturing initiatives
  • Stock Decline: February 26, 2026 – 39% Stock Drop
  • Action: Contact BFA Law to discuss your rights

Why is Eos Being Investigated for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws?

Eos manufactures zinc-based long-duration battery energy storage systems used to store renewable power and support grid reliability.

BFA is investigating whether Eos violated the federal securities laws by making false and misleading statements to investors regarding Eos’s near-term revenue growth, as well as the timing, scale, execution, and reliability of its manufacturing efforts.

Why did Eos’s Stock Drop?

On February 26, 2026, Eos reported a substantial net loss of approximately $970 million for fiscal year 2025 and disclosed full-year 2025 revenue that fell short of the guidance the company had repeatedly reaffirmed, including as recently as November 2025. At the same time, Eos issued weaker-than-expected 2026 revenue guidance. Eos attributed its 2025 results to heavy spending to scale its manufacturing operations, including ramp-up inefficiencies, automation-related costs, and large non-cash financing and asset write-down charges. Eos attributed the disappointing 2026 revenue forecast to slower-than-anticipated production progress and heightened execution risk.

On this news, the price of Eos stock dropped over 39% on February 26, 2026.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/eos-energy-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in Eos, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis, there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:


https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/eos-energy-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.


https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/eos-energy-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.



$CRWV Class Reminder: CoreWeave, Inc. Investors Reminded of the March 13 Securities Class Action Deadline – Investors with Losses Urged to Contact BFA Law

CoreWeave faces securities fraud allegations for misrepresenting customer demand and hiding data center delays, causing a 16% stock drop; investors urged to act by March 13, 2026.

NEW YORK, March 07, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against CoreWeave, Inc. (NASDAQ:CRWV) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after significant stock drops resulting from the potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in CoreWeave, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit.

Key Details of the CoreWeave ($CRWV) Class Action:

  • Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 13, 2026
  • Alleged Misconduct: Misrepresenting its ability to meet customer demand and concealing significant construction delays at its data centers
  • Largest Alleged Stock Decline: November 11, 2025 – 16% Stock Drop
  • Court: U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
  • Action: Contact BFA Law to discuss your rights

Investors have until March 13, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in CoreWeave securities. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey and is captioned Masaitis v. CoreWeave, Inc., et al., No. 2:26-cv-00355.

Why is CoreWeave Being Sued For Securities Fraud?

CoreWeave is an AI-focused cloud computing company that builds and operates data centers offering high-performance GPU infrastructure. CoreWeave relies on multiple partners to develop its data centers and provide the infrastructure needed for its AI computing operations, including Core Scientific, a large digital infrastructure company. On July 7, 2025, CoreWeave announced a merger agreement with Core Scientific.   

During the relevant period, CoreWeave repeatedly assured investors it could capitalize on the “robust” and “unprecedented” demand for its services given its “competitive strengths,” including its ability to “deploy” AI infrastructure “at massive scale” and “rapidly scale our operations.”

As alleged, in truth, CoreWeave overstated its ability to meet customer demand and concealed significant construction delays at its data centers.

Why did CoreWeave’s Stock Drop?

On October 30, 2025, Core Scientific announced it did not receive enough shareholder votes to approve the merger with CoreWeave and, as a result, terminated the merger agreement. This news caused the price of CoreWeave stock to drop $8.87 per share, or more than 6%, from $139.93 per share on October 29, 2025, to $131.06 per share on October 30, 2025.

Then, on November 10, 2025, CoreWeave lowered guidance for revenue, operating income, capital spending, and active power capacity for 2025 due to “temporary delays related to a third-party data center developer who is behind schedule.” This news caused the price of CoreWeave stock to drop $17.22 per share, or more than 16%, from $105.61 per share on November 10, 2025, to $88.39 per share on November 11, 2025.

Finally, on December 15, 2025, The Wall Street Journal reported that the “completion date” for a “huge data-center cluster” in Denton, Texas to be leased by OpenAI, “has been pushed back several months,” and that the site builder, Core Scientific, had flagged delays at the site months earlier. The Wall Street Journal also reported that Core Scientific had flagged additional delays at sites in Texas and elsewhere “since at least February.” This news caused the price of CoreWeave stock to drop $2.85 per share, or more than 3%, from $72.35 per share on December 15, 2025, to $69.50 per share on December 16, 2025.

Click here for more information:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit

.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in CoreWeave, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis, there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:


https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, “Litigation Stars” by Benchmark Litigation, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.


https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/coreweave-inc-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.



U.S. FDA Approves Bristol Myers Squibb’s Sotyktu® (deucravacitinib) for the Treatment of Adults with Active Psoriatic Arthritis

U.S. FDA Approves Bristol Myers Squibb’s Sotyktu® (deucravacitinib) for the Treatment of Adults with Active Psoriatic Arthritis

Significantly more patients treated with once-daily, oral Sotyktu achieved an ACR20 response compared with placebo at Week 16 in the pivotal Phase 3 POETYK PsA-1 and POETYK PsA-2 clinical trials

Sotyktu is the first and only tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor to be approved for this indication

PRINCETON, N.J.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Bristol Myers Squibb (NYSE:BMY) today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Sotyktu® (deucravacitinib) for the treatment of adults with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA).1Sotyktu, an oral, selective tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor, is the first TYK2 inhibitor to be approved for PsA.

“Today’s announcement marks the introduction of a new, differentiated option to treat adults with active psoriatic arthritis,” said Al Reba, senior vice president, Cardiovascular & Immunology Commercialization, Bristol Myers Squibb. “This latest approval of Sotyktu confirms its important role in managing both skin and joint symptoms of psoriatic disease and is a key milestone as we continue to explore its development in diseases that have limited or no treatment options.”

This FDA approval is based on positive results from the pivotal POETYK PsA-1 and POETYK PsA-2 trials, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of Sotyktu 6 mg once daily in adults with active psoriatic arthritis. In both trials, treatment with Sotyktu resulted in significant improvement in disease activity, as measured by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 (the primary endpoint) and Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) response (key secondary endpoint).

Efficacy Results at Week 16 in Adults with Psoriatic Arthritis (NRIa)1

 

PsA-1

PsA-2

Endpoint

Sotyktu

(N=336)

Placebo

(N=334)

Difference from Placebo

(95% CI)

Sotyktu

(N=312)

Placebo

(N=312)

Difference from Placebo

(95% CI)

ACR20 response, %

54b

34

20(12, 27)

54b

39

15 (7, 23)

ACR50 response, %

24

14

11 (5, 17)

29

16

13 (6, 19)

ACR70 response, %

12

5

6 (2, 10)

10

5

5 (1, 9)

Minimal disease activity response, %

19c*

10

9 (4, 14)

26c†

15

11 (5, 17)

American College of Rheumatology >20% (or >50% or >70%) improvement)

ACR50 and ACR70 were additional endpoints. Additional endpoints were not adjusted for multiplicity; therefore, statistical significance has not been established.
N is number of randomized and treated subjects
* Statistically significant from placebo (p=0.0012)
Statistically significant from placebo (p=0.0007)
a NRI = Non-Responder Imputation
b Multiplicity-controlled p<0.0002, Sotyktu vs. placebo comparison
c Minimal disease activity (MDA) = 5 out of 7 outcomes: tender joint count <1; swollen joint count <1; Psoriasis Activity and Severity Index <1 or body surface area <3; patient pain visual analogue scale (VAS) <15; patient global disease activity VAS <20; Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index <0.5; tender entheseal points <1

The overall safety profile of Sotyktu observed in individuals with active psoriatic arthritis was generally consistent with the safety profile in those with plaque psoriasis. Most common adverse reactions (≥1% in Sotyktu and greater than placebo) are: upper respiratory infections, blood creatine phosphokinase increased, herpes simplex, mouth ulcers, folliculitis, and acne. Sotyktu is associated with the following warnings and precautions: hypersensitivity reactions, infections, tuberculosis, malignancy including lymphomas, rhabdomyolysis and elevated CPK, laboratory abnormalities, immunizations, and potential risks related to JAK inhibition.1

“Psoriatic arthritis is a chronic, progressive autoimmune condition that often involves both the joints and skin. Patients often have trouble moving and staying active and can experience pain in the joints, and tendons, or ligaments,”2-4 said Philip J. Mease, MD, director of rheumatology research, Providence Swedish Medical Center, and clinical professor, University of Washington School of Medicine. “New oral, effective first-line treatments are needed. In clinical trials, health-related quality of life was assessed by the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Patients treated with Sotyktu showed improvements in SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) score at Week 16 compared to placebo (key secondary endpoint).1 There were also improvements in all four SF-36 PCS domain scale scores: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily-pain, and general health.1 By aiding in symptom management, Sotyktu could make a meaningful difference for patients.”

“The psoriatic disease community has been waiting for an additional oral treatment to address the debilitating joint and skin symptoms of this disease,” said Steven Taylor, President & Chief Executive Officer of the Arthritis Foundation. “We welcome this new treatment option for people living with psoriatic arthritis.”

The FDA first approved Sotyktu in 2022 for the treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy or phototherapy. Sotyktu is not recommended for use with other potent immunosuppressants in this population. Since then, multiple global regulatory authorities have approved Sotyktu for that indication. Sotyktu has five years of clinical efficacy and safety data in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Today’s approval of Sotyktu in psoriatic arthritis is a tangible demonstration of Bristol Myers Squibb’s commitment to develop medicines that help fill unmet needs in the treatment landscape.

About Psoriatic Arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic, immune-mediated, heterogenous disease with multiple musculoskeletal and skin manifestations, including inflammatory arthritis, enthesitis (inflammation where tendon or ligament attaches to the bone), dactylitis (swelling of finger and toe joints) and psoriatic skin and nail lesions.2 Up to 30 percent of patients with psoriasis go on to develop PsA.5 In addition to impairments in physical function, pain and fatigue caused by PsA, the disease can significantly impact the well-being of patients.6 Patients with PsA are also at increased risk of serious comorbidities.

About the Sotyktu Phase 3 Psoriatic Arthritis Trial Program

The Phase 3 Sotyktu PsA program includes two Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of Sotyktu in adults 18 years of age and older with active PsA: POETYK PsA-1 (IM011-054; NCT04908202) and POETYK PsA-2 (IM011-055; NCT04908189).

POETYK PsA-1 included 670 patients with active PsA who were not previously treated with a biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD naïve). POETYK PsA-2 included 624 patients with active PsA who were bDMARD naïve or had previously received TNFα inhibitor treatment. Patients met the CASPAR criteria for PsA, with at least 3 swollen and 3 tender joints and had an active or documented history of plaque psoriasis. Both trials include a 52-week treatment period comprised of a placebo-controlled treatment period through Week 16, followed by a reallocation and continued active treatment period from Week 16 to Week 52. POETYK PsA-2 also included an apremilast safety reference arm.

The primary endpoint of both trials was the proportion of participants achieving an ACR20 response at Week 16. Key secondary endpoints were also assessed at Week 16 across measures of PsA disease activity.

Patients in both trials completing 52 weeks of treatment were potentially eligible to enroll in open-label extensions through 156 weeks.7,8

About Sotyktu® (deucravacitinib)

Sotyktu is an oral, selective, tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor with a unique mechanism of action. It is the first selective TYK2 inhibitor in clinical studies across moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and active psoriatic arthritis.9 Bristol Myers Squibb scientists designed Sotyktu to selectively target TYK2, thereby mediating the signaling of interleukin (IL)-23, IL-12 and Type 1 interferons (IFN), key cytokines involved in the pathogenesis of plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Sotyktu achieves a high degree of selectivity by binding to the regulatory domain of TYK2, resulting in allosteric inhibition of TYK2 and mediation of its downstream functions. Sotyktu has been shown to have high selectivity for TYK2 at physiologically relevant concentrations and has not been shown to inhibit JAK1, JAK2 or JAK3 in in vitro assays.9 The precise mechanism linking inhibition of TYK2 enzyme to therapeutic effectiveness is not currently known.

Sotyktu is approved in numerous countries around the world for the treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.10-12

The efficacy and safety of Sotyktu in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were evaluated in POETYK PSO-1 and POETYK PSO-2, multi-national, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled 52-week Phase 3 studies. In total, 664 patients were enrolled in POETYK PSO-1, and 1,020 patients were enrolled in POETYK PSO-2. All participants had moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and were candidates for phototherapy or systemic therapy.

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION

INDICATIONS

SOTYKTU® (deucravacitinib) is indicated for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in adults who are candidates for systemic therapy or phototherapy.

Limitations of Use:

SOTYKTU is not recommended for use in combination with other potent immunosuppressants.

SOTYKTU® is indicated for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis in adults.

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION

CONTRAINDICATIONS

SOTYKTU is contraindicated in patients with a history of hypersensitivity reaction to deucravacitinib or to any of the excipients in SOTYKTU.

WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS

Hypersensitivity Reactions: Hypersensitivity reactions such as angioedema have been reported. If a clinically significant hypersensitivity reaction occurs, institute appropriate therapy and discontinue SOTYKTU.

Infections: SOTYKTU may increase the risk of infections. Serious infections have been reported in patients who received SOTYKTU. The most common serious infections reported with SOTYKTU included pneumonia and COVID-19. Avoid use of SOTYKTU in patients with an active or serious infection. Consider the risks and benefits of SOTYKTU prior to initiating treatment in patients:

  • with chronic or recurrent infection

  • who have been exposed to tuberculosis

  • with a history of a serious or an opportunistic infection

  • with underlying conditions that may predispose them to infection.

Closely monitor patients for the development of signs and symptoms of infection during and after treatment. A patient who develops a new infection during treatment should undergo prompt and complete diagnostic testing, have appropriate antimicrobial therapy initiated, and be closely monitored. Interrupt SOTYKTU if a serious infection occurs. Do not resume SOTYKTU until the infection resolves or is adequately treated.

Viral Reactivation

Herpes virus reactivation (e.g., herpes zoster, herpes simplex) was reported in clinical trials with SOTYKTU. In the 16-week placebo-controlled period of Trials PSO-1 and PSO-2, herpes simplex infections were reported in 17 patients (6.8 per 100 patient-years) treated with SOTYKTU, and 1 patient (0.8 per 100 patient-years) treated with placebo. Multidermatomal herpes zoster was reported in an immunocompetent patient. The clinical implications of SOTYKTU on viral hepatitis reactivation are unknown. Consider viral hepatitis screening and monitoring for reactivation in accordance with clinical guidelines before starting and during therapy with SOTYKTU. If signs of reactivation occur, consult a hepatitis specialist. SOTYKTU is not recommended for use in patients with active hepatitis B or hepatitis C.

Tuberculosis (TB): In trials of PSO-1 and PSO-2, of 4 patients with latent TB who were treated with SOTYKTU and received appropriate TB prophylaxis, no patients developed active TB (during the mean follow-up of 34 weeks). One patient, who did not have latent TB, developed active TB after receiving 54 weeks of SOTYKTU. Evaluate patients for latent and active TB infection prior to initiating treatment with SOTYKTU. Do not administer SOTYKTU to patients with active TB. Initiate treatment of latent TB prior to administering SOTYKTU. Consider anti-TB therapy prior to initiation of SOTYKTU in patients with a past history of latent or active TB in whom an adequate course of treatment cannot be confirmed. Monitor patients for signs and symptoms of active TB during treatment.

Malignancy including Lymphomas: Malignancies, including lymphomas, were observed in clinical trials with SOTYKTU. Consider the benefits and risks for the individual patient prior to initiating or continuing therapy with SOTYKTU, particularly in patients with a known malignancy (other than a successfully treated non-melanoma skin cancer) and patients who develop a malignancy during treatment with SOTYKTU.

Rhabdomyolysis and Elevated CPK: Treatment with SOTYKTU was associated with an increased incidence of asymptomatic creatine phosphokinase (CPK) elevation and rhabdomyolysis compared to placebo. Discontinue SOTYKTU if markedly elevated CPK levels occur or myopathy is diagnosed or suspected. Instruct patients to promptly report unexplained muscle pain, tenderness or weakness, particularly if accompanied by malaise or fever.

Laboratory Abnormalities: Treatment with SOTYKTU was associated with increases in triglyceride levels. Periodically evaluate serum triglycerides according to clinical guidelines during treatment. Treatment with SOTYKTU has been associated with liver enzyme elevation. Evaluate liver enzymes at baseline and during treatment with SOTYKTU in patients with known or suspected liver disease according to routine management. If increases in liver enzymes occur and drug-induced liver injury is suspected, interrupt SOTYKTU until a diagnosis of liver injury is excluded.

Immunizations: Prior to initiating therapy with SOTYKTU, complete all age-appropriate immunizations according to current immunization guidelines including prophylactic herpes zoster vaccination. Avoid use of live vaccines in patients treated with SOTYKTU. The response to live or non-live vaccines has not been evaluated.

Potential Risks Related to JAK Inhibition: It is not known whether tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibition may be associated with the observed or potential adverse reactions of Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibition. In a large, randomized, postmarketing safety trial of a JAK inhibitor in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), patients 50 years of age and older with at least one cardiovascular risk factor, higher rates of all-cause mortality, including sudden cardiovascular death, major adverse cardiovascular events, overall thrombosis, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) were observed in patients treated with the JAK inhibitor compared to those treated with TNF blockers. SOTYKTU is not approved for use in RA.

ADVERSE REACTIONS

Most common adverse reactions (≥1% of patients on SOTYKTU and more frequently than with placebo) in patients with plaque psoriasis include upper respiratory infections, blood creatine phosphokinase increased, herpes simplex, mouth ulcers, folliculitis and acne.

The overall safety profile of SOTYKTU observed in patients with active psoriatic arthritis was generally consistent with the safety profile observed in patients with plaque psoriasis.

SPECIFIC POPULATIONS

Pregnancy: Available data from case reports on SOTYKTU use during pregnancy are insufficient to evaluate a drug-associated risk of major birth defects, miscarriage, or adverse maternal or fetal outcomes. Report pregnancies to the Bristol Myers Squibb Company’s Adverse Event reporting line at 1-800-721-5072.

Lactation: There are no data on the presence of SOTYKTU in human milk, the effects on the breastfed infant, or the effects on milk production. SOTYKTU is present in rat milk. When a drug is present in animal milk, it is likely that the drug will be present in human milk. The developmental and health benefits of breastfeeding should be considered along with the mother’s clinical need for SOTYKTU and any potential adverse effects on the breastfed infant from SOTYKTU or from the underlying maternal condition.

Hepatic Impairment: SOTYKTU is not recommended for use in patients with severe hepatic impairment.

SOTYKTU is available in 6 mg tablets.

Please see U.S. Full Prescribing Information, including Medication Guide, for SOTYKTU.

SOTYKTU and the SOTYKTU logo are trademarks of Bristol Myers Squibb Company.

© 2026 Bristol Myers Squibb Company

1787-US-2500540 03/26

About Bristol Myers Squibb

Bristol Myers Squibb is a global biopharmaceutical company whose mission is to discover, develop and deliver innovative medicines that help patients prevail over serious diseases. For more information about Bristol Myers Squibb, visit us at BMS.com or follow us on LinkedIn, X, YouTube, Facebook and Instagram.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 regarding, among other things, the research, development and commercialization of pharmaceutical products. All statements that are not statements of historical facts are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and projections about our future financial results, goals, plans and objectives and involve inherent risks, assumptions and uncertainties, including internal or external factors that could delay, divert or change any of them in the next several years, that are difficult to predict, may be beyond our control and could cause our future financial results, goals, plans and objectives to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, the statements. These risks, assumptions, uncertainties and other factors include, among others, whether Sotyktu (deucravacitinib) for the additional indication described in this release will be commercially successful, any marketing approvals, if granted, may have significant limitations on their use and that continued approval of Sotyktu for such indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed. Forward-looking statements in this press release should be evaluated together with the many risks and uncertainties that affect Bristol Myers Squibb’s business and market, particularly those identified in the cautionary statement and risk factors discussion in Bristol Myers Squibb’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, as updated by our subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The forward-looking statements included in this document are made only as of the date of this document and except as otherwise required by applicable law, Bristol Myers Squibb undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events, changed circumstances or otherwise.

References

1 SOTYKTU Prescribing Information. SOTYKTU U.S. Product Information. March 2026. Princeton, N.J.: Bristol Myers Squibb Company.

2 American College of Rheumatology. “Psoriatic Arthritis.” https://www.rheumatology.org/I-Am-A/Patient-Caregiver/Diseases-Conditions/Psoriatic-Arthritis. Accessed October 5, 2020.

3 Cleveland Clinic. Psoriatic arthritis. Cleveland Clinic. Accessed December 10, 2025. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/13286-psoriatic-arthritis

4 National Psoriasis Foundation. About psoriatic arthritis. National Psoriasis Foundation. Accessed December 10, 2025. https://www.psoriasis.org/about-psoriatic-arthritis/#overview

5 Mease P, Gladman D, Papp K, et al. Prevalence of rheumatologist-diagnosed psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis in European/North American dermatology clinics. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2013;69(5). doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2013.07.023.

6 Dures E, Bowen C, Brooke M, et al. Diagnosis and initial management in psoriatic arthritis: a qualitative study with patients. Rheumatology Advances in Practice. 2019;3(2) https://doi.org/10.1093/rap/rkz022.

7 van der Heidje D, Mease P, Paul C, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Deucravacitinib up to Week 52: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 3 Study in Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Who Are Naive to Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs. Presented at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Convergence; October 24-29, 2025.

8 Mease P, Chandran V, Armstrong A, et al. Efficacy and safety of deucravacitinib up to week 52 from POETYK PsA-2: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Presented at the European Congress of Rheumatology; June 11-14, 2025.

9 Chimalakonda A, Burke J, Cheng L, et al. Selectivity Profile of the Tyrosine Kinase 2 Inhibitor Deucravacitinib Compared with Janus Kinase 1/2/3 Inhibitors. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2021;11(5):1763-1776. doi:10.1007/s13555-021-00596-8

10 Bristol Myers Squibb. The world’s first oral TYK2 allosteric inhibitor, Sotyktu® (deucravacitinib tablets), has been approved in China. Press release. October 20, 2023. https://www.bms.com/cn/media/press-release-listing/10202023.html

11 Bristol Myers Squibb. TYK2 inhibitor Sotyktu® Received manufacturing and marketing approval for 6 mg tablets. Press release. September 26, 2022. https://www.bms.com/jp/media/press-release-listing/press-release-listing-2022/20220926.html

12 Bristol Myers Squibb. New treatment for adults with plaque psoriasis arrives in Mexico. Press release. February 18, 2025. https://www.bms.com/mx/media/press-release-listing/bristolmyerssquibbampliasucompromisodelargadataconlainvestigaciondelcanceratravesdecontinente2continente4cancer2.html

corporatefinancial-news

Bristol Myers Squibb

Media Inquiries:

[email protected]

Investors:

[email protected]

KEYWORDS: New Jersey United States North America

INDUSTRY KEYWORDS: Biotechnology FDA Health Pharmaceutical Clinical Trials

MEDIA:

Logo
Logo

NEWS FLASH: Broad Arrow Smashes World Records with Collection of Unobtanium Supercars on Day One of Amelia Concours Auction

Nero 2003 Ferrari Enzo Leads Collection at $15,185,000 | 1988 Porsche 959 Sport Achieves New Record for the Model at $5,505,000 | 2021 Ferrari Monza SP2 Sets New Benchmark at $4,955,000 | 2017 Ferrari F12tdf Reaches New Heights at $4,185,000 | 2015 Porsche 918 Spyder Sells for World Record Price at $2,975,000 | Outside the Collection, Paint-to-Sample 2005 Porsche Carrera GT Doubles Previous Record at $6,715,000

Amelia Island, Florida, March 06, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Broad Arrow Auctions, driven by Hagerty (NYSE: HGTY), set new standards for some of the collector car market’s most sought-after supercars during the first evening of its two-day 2026 Amelia Concours Auction. Held at the Ritz-Carlton, Amelia Island, the auction room was packed as cars sold throughout the evening achieved strong prices, with the Private Collection of Unobtanium Supercars saved for the final, eagerly awaited lots.

The 352-mile, original-owner, well-optioned 2015 Porsche 918 Spyder opened the group with immediate interest, selling for a final $2,975,000 to set a new auction world record price for a non-Weissach model. Next up, the 2017 Ferrari F12tdf, finished in a stunning Ferrari Tailor Made specification of Azzurro California with Blu Scozia and Bianco Avus stripes over Blu Sterling leather, ignited an instant bidding battle between no less than five bidders in the room. After an extended competition as bidders on the phones jumped in as well, the single-owner car showing less than 100 miles sold for a final world record price of $4,185,000.

The virtually new, 16-mile, single-owner 2021 Ferrari Monza SP2 entered the Ritz-Carlton ballroom as the very first example ever offered at auction in North America, and it left setting a new world record auction price of $4,955,000. This nearly doubles the previous highest public price paid for an SP2. The star of the sale, an original-owner, as-new 2003 Ferrari Enzo, one of a mere dozen North American-delivery examples factory-finished in the ultra-rare Nero D.S., opened with an enthusiastic bid of $10,000,000 on the phone. The bidding quickly jumped to $12,000,000, with several bidders on the phones battling it out before new bidders joined from the room. After a heated back-and-forth, the Ferrari sold for a final $15,185,000 to a bidder on the phone, becoming the second most valuable Enzo ever sold at auction.

Closing out the Private Collection was a 1988 Porsche 959 Sport, one of a mere 29 rare U.S.-market lightweight 959 Sport models and part of the single group of eight examples of the groundbreaking car officially imported to the U.S. through Porsche Motorsport in 1988. Another sustained competition broke out for the incredible example of Porsche’s first supercar, with multiple bidders in the room and over the phones driving the final price to $5,505,000, a new world record price for a 959 Sport at auction. 

Outside the collection, a highly anticipated 2005 Porsche Carrera GT closed out the first night of the auction, with a statement-making opening bid of $5,000,000. Offered without reserve, limitation number 0555 is the singular Paint-to-Sample Gulf Blue over Ascot Brown Carrera GT delivered to the U.S. The exquisite, low-mileage example of the ultimate analog supercar of the 2000s saw new bidders raise their paddles multiple times as Broad Arrow’s Principal Auctioneer, Lydia Fenet, called “going twice”. The Carrera GT eventually sold for a final $6,715,000. This more than doubles the previous auction record price for the model. 

Broad Arrow’s 2026 Amelia Concours Auction continues on Saturday, March 7 at 10:30 a.m. ET at The Ritz-Carlton, Amelia Island. Follow the auction action live at broadarrowauctions.com. An official press release and complete results will be issued following the close of the sale.


Editor’s Notes 

Photo Credit: All images by Nick Zabrecky/Courtesy of Broad Arrow Auctions.

About Broad Arrow Auctions 

Broad Arrow Auctions, driven by Hagerty (NYSE: HGTY), is a leading global collector car auction house founded in 2021 by industry veterans. As the fastest-growing auction house in its segment, Broad Arrow connects exceptional collector cars with enthusiasts worldwide through flagship events including The Broad Arrow Quail Auction (the official auction of The Quail, A Motorsports Gathering), The Amelia Concours Auction (the official auction of The Amelia Concours), The Porsche Auction in collaboration with Air | Water by Luftgekühlt, the Las Vegas Auction in partnership with Concours at Wynn Las Vegas, as well as international auctions held in partnership with Concorso d’Eleganza Villa d’Este, Zoute Grand Prix, and Auto Zürich.

Learn more at broadarrowauctions.com and follow us on InstagramFacebookLinkedIn, and X

About Hagerty, Inc. (NYSE: HGTY) 

Hagerty is a company built by drivers for drivers, protecting 2.7 million vehicles in the United States, Canada and the UK. We make it easier and more enjoyable for enthusiasts to drive and celebrate the machines they love through innovative insurance products, live and digital auctions, engaging media and events, as well as the Hagerty Drivers Club, the world’s largest community of car lovers.  

For more information, please visit www.hagerty.com or www.newsroom.hagerty.com.   

Forward-Looking Statements - This press release contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws. All statements provided, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements, including those regarding Hagerty’s future operating results and financial position, Hagerty’s business strategy and plans, products, services, and technology implementations, market conditions, growth and trends, expansion plans and opportunities, and Hagerty’s objectives for future operations. The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “envision,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “target,” “potential,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “continue,” “ongoing,” “contemplate,” and similar expressions, and the negative of these expressions, are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

Hagerty has based these forward-looking statements largely on current expectations about future events, which may not materialize. Actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements. These factors include, among other things, Hagerty’s ability to: (i) compete effectively within our industry and attract and retain our insurance policyholders and paid Hagerty Drivers Club (“HDC”) subscribers; (ii) maintain key strategic relationships with our insurance distribution and underwriting carrier partners; (iii) prevent, monitor, and detect fraudulent activity; (iv) manage risks associated with disruptions, interruptions, outages or other issues with our technology platforms or our use of third-party services; (v) accelerate the adoption of our membership and marketplace products and services, as well as any new insurance programs and products we offer; (vi) manage the cyclical nature of the insurance business, including through any periods of recession, economic downturn or inflation; (vii) address unexpected increases in the frequency or severity of claims, and (viii) comply with the numerous laws and regulations applicable to our business, including state, federal and foreign laws relating to insurance and rate increases, privacy, the internet, and accounting matters. 

The forward-looking statements herein represent the judgment of Hagerty as of the date of this release and Hagerty disclaims any intent or obligation to publicly update or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments, or otherwise. This press release should be read in conjunction with the information included in Hagerty’s other press releases, reports and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Understanding the information contained in these filings is important in order to fully understand Hagerty’s reported financial results and its business outlook for future periods.

Attachments



Ian Kelleher
Broad Arrow Auctions
+1 917-971-4008
[email protected]

Meghan McGrail
Broad Arrow Auctions
+1 519-365-8750
[email protected]

INVESTOR ALERT: Eos Energy Enterprises, Inc. Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead the Eos Energy Class Action Lawsuit – RGRD Law

SAN DIEGO, March 06, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers or acquirers of Eos Energy Enterprises, Inc. (NASDAQ: EOSE) securities between November 5, 2025 and February 26, 2026, inclusive (the “Class Period”), have until May 5, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Eos Energy class action lawsuit. Captioned Yung v. Eos Energy Enterprises, Inc., No. 26-cv-02372 (D.N.J.), the Eos Energy class action lawsuit charges Eos Energy and certain of Eos Energy’s top executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the

Eos Energy

class action lawsuit, please provide your information here:


https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-eos-energy-enterprises-class-action-lawsuit-eose.html

You can also contact attorney

J.C. Sanchez

of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at

[email protected]

.

CASE ALLEGATIONS: Eos Energy designs, manufactures, and markets zinc-based battery energy storage systems intended for utility‑scale commercial and industrial applications.

The Eos Energy class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Eos Energy was unable to achieve the ramp in production and capacity utilization required to achieve its previously set guidance; (ii) Eos Energy’s battery line downtime was running well above industry norms, the design intent of the line, and internal forecasts; (iii) Eos Energy was experiencing delays in the ability for its automated bipolar production to hit quality targets; and (iv) Eos Energy’s inadequate systems and processes prevented it from ensuring reasonably accurate guidance and that its public disclosures were timely, accurate, and complete.

The Eos Energy class action lawsuit further alleges that on February 26, 2026, Eos Energy announced fourth quarter and full year 2025 results, reporting, among other things, full year 2025 revenue of $114.2 million, falling far short of Eos Energy’s previously issued guidance of $150 million to $160 million for fiscal year 2025 revenue. Eos Energy allegedly further reported a “[g]ross loss of $143.8 million,” a “[n]et loss attributable to shareholders of $969.6 million,” an “[a]djusted EBITDA loss of $219.1 million,” and further disclosed that its “capacity milestone was reached 5 weeks later than initially planned.” On this news, the price of Eos Energy stock fell more than 39%, according to the complaint.

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Eos Energy securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Eos Energy class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the Eos Energy class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Eos Energy class action lawsuit. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Eos Energy class action lawsuit.

ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world’s leading law firms representing investors in securities fraud and shareholder rights litigation. Our Firm ranked #1 on the most recent ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report, recovering more than $916 million for investors in 2025. This marks our fourth #1 ranking in the past five years. And in those five years alone, Robbins Geller recovered $8.4 billion for investors – $3.4 billion more than any other law firm. With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs’ firms in the world, and the Firm’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Please visit the following page for more information:


https://www.rgrdlaw.com/services-litigation-securities-fraud.html

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. 
Services may be performed by attorneys in any of our offices. 

Contact:
        Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
        J.C. Sanchez
        655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101
        800-449-4900
        [email protected]



AMC Networks Announces Early Tender Results of Any and All Exchange Offer and Consent Solicitation for its 10.25% Senior Secured Notes due 2029

NEW YORK, March 06, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — AMC Networks Inc. (“AMC Networks” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: AMCX) today announced the early participation and consent results in connection with its previously announced (i) exchange offer (the “Exchange Offer”) to Eligible Holders (as defined below) to exchange any and all of its outstanding 10.25% Senior Secured Notes due 2029 (the “Old Notes”) for its newly-issued 10.50% Senior Secured Notes due 2032 (the “New Notes”), and (ii) the solicitation of consents (the “Consent Solicitation”) from holders of the Old Notes with respect to the amendment (the “Proposed Amendment”) to the indenture governing the Old Notes (the “Old Notes Indenture”) described below, on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in a Confidential Offering Memorandum and Consent Solicitation Statement, dated as of February 23, 2026 (the “Offering Memorandum”). Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the Offering Memorandum.

The Company has been advised that as of 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on March 6, 2026 (the “Early Tender Time”), approximately $830.6 million aggregate principal amount of outstanding Old Notes, representing approximately 95% of the outstanding Old Notes (other than Old Notes beneficially owned by the Company or its affiliates), had been validly tendered (and not validly withdrawn) pursuant to the Exchange Offer, and the corresponding Consents from holders of those Old Notes were delivered (and not validly revoked) pursuant to the Consent Solicitation. The Company has also been advised that as of 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on March 6, 2026, holders of approximately $9.9 million aggregate principal amount of outstanding Old Notes delivered (and did not validly revoke) their Consents without tendering Old Notes (the “Consent Only Option”). Consents from holders of at least a majority in aggregate principal amount of outstanding Old Notes (other than Old Notes beneficially owned by the Company or its affiliates) voting as a single class (the “Requisite Notes Consents”) must be delivered and not validly revoked to adopt the Proposed Amendment. Accordingly, as of the Early Tender Time, the Requisite Notes Consents have been delivered.

The Company and the guarantors of the Old Notes expect to enter into a Supplemental Indenture (the “Supplemental Indenture”) to the Old Notes Indenture providing for the Proposed Amendment on March 9, 2026. The Proposed Amendment will amend the covenant that limits restricted payments in order to permit buybacks, purchases, redemptions, retirements or other acquisitions of AMC Networks Inc.’s equity interests in an aggregate amount not to exceed $50,000,000. The Supplemental Indenture will be effective immediately upon execution thereof, but the Proposed Amendment will not be operative until the time when all of the Old Notes that have been validly tendered (and not validly withdrawn) prior to the Early Tender Time have been accepted for exchange in accordance with the terms of the Offering Memorandum. The Company expects settlement of the Old Notes validly tendered (and not validly withdrawn) by the Early Tender Time to occur on March 13, 2026 (“Early Settlement Date”).

Withdrawal rights for the Exchange Offer expired at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on March 6, 2026, and, accordingly, Old Notes validly tendered in the Exchange Offer may no longer be withdrawn. In addition, the deadline for holders to deliver their Consents pursuant to the Consent Only Option expired at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on March 6, 2026. Consents delivered in accordance with the Consent Only Option may be validly revoked at any time at or prior to the time and date on which the Supplemental Indenture is executed (the “Consent Time”) and may not be validly revoked at any time after the Consent Time. Holders of Old Notes who validly delivered their Consents pursuant to the Consent Only Option will not receive any consideration for delivering their Consents.

Eligible Holders of the Old Notes who validly tendered (and did not validly withdraw) their Old Notes prior to the Early Tender Time will be entitled to receive the total consideration of $1,065 in aggregate principal amount of New Notes per $1,000 principal amount of Old Notes tendered (the “Total Consideration”), as described in the Offering Memorandum.

Eligible Holders who have not yet tendered or have validly withdrawn their Old Notes have until 5:00 P.M., New York City time, on March 23, 2026, unless extended by the Company (such time and date, as it may be extended, the “Expiration Time”) to tender their Old Notes pursuant to the Exchange Offer. Eligible Holders of the Old Notes who validly tender (and do not validly withdraw) their Old Notes after the Early Tender Time but at or prior to the Expiration Time will be entitled to receive exchange consideration of $1,015 in aggregate principal amount of New Notes per $1,000 principal amount of Old Notes tendered (the “Exchange Consideration”), as described in the Offering Memorandum. Such exchanges will be settled promptly by the Company after the Expiration Time, which is expected to occur on March 25, 2026 (the “Final Settlement Date”), assuming the conditions to the Exchange Offer have either been satisfied or waived by the Company at or prior to the Expiration Time.

In addition, the aggregate Total Consideration or aggregate Exchange Consideration, as applicable, will be reduced by an amount equal to the result of (x) the aggregate amount of accrued and unpaid interest due on the New Notes to be issued to Eligible Holders from and including the last interest payment date for the Original 2032 Notes (as defined below) to but not including the applicable Settlement Date (the “New Notes Accrued Interest”) less (y) the aggregate amount of accrued and unpaid interest due on the Old Notes validly tendered and accepted by us from and including the last interest payment date for such Old Notes to but not including the applicable Settlement Date (the “Old Notes Accrued Interest” and the difference between the New Notes Accrued Interest and the Old Notes Accrued Interest, the “Net Interest Deduction”). No accrued interest will be paid on Old Notes that are tendered and accepted.

Holders who validly tender their Old Notes after the Early Tender Time will be deemed to consent to the Amendment, and holders may not deliver Consents to the Amendment without validly tendering their Old Notes in the Exchange Offer.

The New Notes will be a further issuance of, and will be in addition to, the 10.50% Senior Secured Notes due 2032 (the “Original 2032 Notes”) that the Company issued on July 3, 2025 in the aggregate principal amount of $400 million. The New Notes will be fungible with the Original 2032 Notes and trade under the same CUSIP numbers as the Original 2032 Notes (except that New Notes issued pursuant to Regulation S will trade separately under a different CUSIP number until at least 40 days after the closing date and thereafter, subject to the terms of the Indenture and the applicable procedures of the depositary).

The Exchange Offer and Consent Solicitation, including the Company’s acceptance of validly tendered Old Notes and payment of the applicable consideration, is conditioned on the satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions, as described in the Offering Memorandum. The Company may terminate, withdraw, amend or extend the Exchange Offer and/or Consent Solicitation in its sole discretion, subject to certain exceptions.

The Exchange Offer is being made, and the New Notes are being offered and issued, only to holders of Old Notes who are reasonably believed to be (i) “qualified institutional buyers” as defined in Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) or (ii) not U.S. persons (as defined in Regulation S under the Securities Act) or purchasing for the account or benefit of U.S. persons, other than a distributor, and are purchasing the New Notes in an offshore transaction in accordance with Regulation S. The holders of Old Notes who are eligible to participate in the Exchange Offer pursuant to the foregoing conditions are referred to as “Eligible Holders.” Only Eligible Holders are authorized to receive or review the Offering Memorandum or to participate in the Exchange Offer and Consent Solicitation.

J.P. Morgan Securities LLC is acting as lead dealer manager and solicitation agent and Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Fifth Third Securities, Inc., Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Truist Securities, Inc. and U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc. are acting as co-dealer managers and solicitation agents.

The Offering Memorandum will be distributed only to holders of Old Notes that complete and return a letter of eligibility confirming that they are Eligible Holders. Copies of the eligibility letter are available to holders through the information and exchange agent for the Exchange Offer and Consent Solicitation, D.F. King & Co. Inc., at (800) 967-7510 (U.S. toll-free) or (646) 989-1649 (Banks and Brokers) or [email protected].

The Exchange Offer and Consent Solicitation is made only by, and pursuant to the terms of, the Offering Memorandum, and the information in this news release is qualified by reference thereto.

This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to exchange or purchase the New Notes, nor shall there be any offer or exchange of New Notes in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful. In addition, this press release is neither an offer to exchange or purchase nor a solicitation of an offer to sell any Old Notes in the Exchange Offer or a solicitation of consents to the Amendment, and this press release does not constitute a notice of redemption with respect to any securities.

The New Notes have not been and will not be registered under the Securities Act or any state securities laws and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration or an applicable exemption from registration requirements. Accordingly, the New Notes are being offered for exchange only to persons reasonably believed to be (i) “qualified institutional buyers” (as defined in Rule 144A under the Securities Act) or (ii) not U.S. persons (as defined in Regulation S under the Securities Act) or purchasing for the account or benefit of U.S. persons, other than a distributor, and are purchasing the New Notes in an offshore transaction in accordance with Regulation S.

About AMC Networks

AMC Networks (Nasdaq: AMCX) is home to many of the greatest stories and characters in TV and film and the premier destination for passionate and engaged fan communities around the world. The Company creates and curates celebrated series and films across distinct brands and makes them available to audiences everywhere. Its portfolio includes targeted streaming services AMC+, Acorn TV, Shudder, Sundance Now, ALLBLK, HIDIVE and All Reality; cable networks AMC, BBC AMERICA (which includes U.S. distribution and sales responsibilities for BBC News), IFC, SundanceTV and We TV; and film distribution labels Independent Film Company and RLJE Films. The Company also operates AMC Studios, its in-house studio, production and distribution operation behind acclaimed and fan-favorite original franchises including The Walking Dead Universe and the Anne Rice Immortal Universe; and AMC Networks International, its international programming business.

This press release may contain statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995,
including statements concerning the timing, terms and completion of the Exchange Offer and Consent Solicitation
. These statements are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Investors are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or results and involve risks and uncertainties and that actual results or developments may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including financial community and rating agency perceptions of the Company and its business, operations, financial condition and the industries in which it operates and the factors described in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the sections titled “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” contained therein. The Company disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained herein.

Contacts

Investor Relations
Nicholas Seibert
[email protected]
Corporate Communications
Georgia Juvelis
[email protected]