NEW YORK, March 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of Grocery Outlet Holding Corp. (NASDAQ: GO), Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC (NASDAQ: PSNY), Arconic Corporation (ARNC), and Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. (NASDAQ: IAS). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found at the link provided.
Grocery Outlet Holding Corp. (NASDAQ: GO)
Class Period: November 7, 2023 - May 7, 2024
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 31, 2025
The Complaint alleges that after-market on May 7, 2024, Grocery Outlet announced its financial results for the first quarter of fiscal 2024, published significantly below-expectation guidance for the second quarter, and further reduced its guidance for the full fiscal year 2024. The Complaint states that the Company attributed its results and lowered guidance on “unforeseen systems transition costs that surfaced at the end of the quarter” and the resulting “residual expense from our commission support program as we finish store physical inventory counts in the second quarter.” Following this news, Grocery Outlet’s stock price fell to $20.88 per share on May 8, 2024, a decline of about 19.38% in the span of just a single day.
For more information on the Grocery Outlet class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/GO
Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC (NASDAQ: PSNY)
Class Period: November 14, 2022 - January 16, 2025
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 31, 2025
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Polestar’s financial statements during the Class Period were materially misstated; (2) Polestar understated its internal control weaknesses; and (3) as a result, defendants’ statements about Polestar’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
For more information on the Polestar class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/PSNY
Arconic Corporation (ARNC)
Class Period: April 19, 2022 - May 3, 2023
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 31, 2025
According to the complaint, during the class period, defendants failed to disclose to investors that in April 2022 Apollo had made a premium offer of $34-$36 to purchase all the outstanding equity interest of Arconic in an all-cash transaction. After rejecting the offer, Arconic repurchased its shares in large quantities at prices significantly below Apollo's offer.
On December 12, 2022, Apollo submitted a revised proposal to acquire Arconic in an all-cash transaction at a price of $30.00 per share. Plaintiff alleges that Arconic continued to engage in share repurchases at prices materially below Apollo's offer.
The complaint alleges that on May 4, 2023, Arconic announced that it had entered into an agreement to be acquired by Apollo in an all-cash transaction at $30.00 per share. In response, the price of Arconic common stock increased $6.38 per share, or 28.3%, from a closing price on May 3, 2023 of $22.55 per share to a closing price on May 4, 2023 of $28.93 per share.
For more information on the Arconic class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/ARNC
Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. (NASDAQ: IAS)
Class Period: March 2, 2023 - February 27, 2024
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 31, 2025
The complaint alleges, among other things, that during the Class Period, “Defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose (i) that IAS was experiencing a new material trend of increased competitive pricing pressures and that, as a result, IAS had been forced to cut prices to compensate for weakening demand and slowing revenue growth; (ii) that IAS’s pricing function was no longer ‘favorable’ and IAS could not sustain its pricing and drive price increases; (iii) that pricing had become a key differentiator between IAS and its competitor necessary to close major renewals and new deals; (iv) that the risk that competition ‘could result in increased pricing pressure’ or ‘could put pressure on us to change our prices’ had in fact transpired; and (v) as a result, the IAS’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.”
The complaint further alleges that “[a]s a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company’s shares, Plaintiff and putative class members have suffered significant losses and damages.”
For more information on the IAS class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/IAS
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com
