Sign In  |  Register  |  About Pleasanton  |  Contact Us

Pleasanton, CA
September 01, 2020 1:32pm
7-Day Forecast | Traffic
  • Search Hotels in Pleasanton

  • ROOMS:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Mercury Systems, Onsemi, BioNTech, and BioVie and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm

NEW YORK, Feb. 06, 2024 (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 Mercury Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: MRCY), ON Semiconductor Corporation (NASDAQ: ON), BioNTech SE (NASDAQ: BNTX), and BioVie Inc. (NASDAQ: BIVI). 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.

Mercury Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: MRCY)

Class Period: December 7, 2020 - June 23, 2023

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 12, 2024

Mercury Systems is a technology company that produces component modules and subsystems for the aerospace and defense industries. In December 2020, Mercury Systems acquired Physical Optics Corporation (“POC”).

The Mercury Systems class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statement and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Mercury Systems’ serial acquirer strategy was not working and Mercury Systems was using improper revenue recognition practices such as changing to long-term contracts to mask deteriorating organic growth; (ii) Mercury Systems’ acquisition of POC caused POC to lose its small business accreditation, which prevented POC from winning contracts that made up a large portion of its historical business; (iii) Mercury Systems had at least twenty programs that were suffering and not performing well; and (iv) Mercury Systems’ initiative to increase margins was not working and was in fact cutting into margins.

The Mercury Systems class action lawsuit further alleges that on July 26, 2022, Glasshouse Research initiated coverage of Mercury Systems with a strong sell report entitled “Roll-Up Mercury Systems Set to Unravel.” The Mercury Systems class action lawsuit alleges that on this news, the price of Mercury Systems common stock fell nearly 8%.

Then, as the Mercury Systems class action lawsuit further alleges, on May 2, 2023, Mercury Systems reported its third quarter of 2023 financial results which revealed that Mercury Systems forecast revenue to be in the range of $990.0 million to $1.01 billion (down from $1.01 billion to $1.05 billion), GAAP net loss of $19.0 million to $11.1 million (down from GAAP net income of $13.9 million to $24.8 million), adjusted EBITDA in a range of $160.0 million to $170.0 million (down from $202.5 million to $215.0 million), and adjusted EPS in a range of $1.36 to $1.50 per share (down from $1.90 to $2.08 per share). On this news, the price of Mercury Systems common stock fell more than 17%, the complaint alleges.

Thereafter, on June 23, 2023, Mercury Systems announced a series of changes to leadership and its Board of Directors, including changes to the positions of President and CEO, the appointment of a new independent director, and the identification of a second new independent director and a permanent CFO, the complaint further alleges. The Mercury Systems class action lawsuit alleges that on this news, the price of Mercury Systems common stock fell nearly 10%.

For more information on the Mercury Systems class action go to:

ON Semiconductor Corporation (NASDAQ: ON)

Class Period: May 1, 2023, - October 27, 2023 (Common Stock Only)

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 12, 2024

Onsemi manufactures and sells semiconductor components for various electronic devices worldwide, including power and sensing solutions, and technologies for the electrification of the automotive industry. Critical to onsemi’s long-term growth and success is its strategy to focus on the development, manufacture, and sale of a variety of products incorporating silicon carbide (“SiC”). A substantial portion of onsemi’s SiC products are necessary components of a number of systems used in the production of electric vehicles (“EVs”). Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made repeated misrepresentations to investors regarding the “stability” and “visibility” of the demand for onsemi’s SiC and other products, and the sustainability of onsemi’s revenue growth, by overstating the impact of onsemi’s long-term supply agreements (“LTSAs”) on the achievability of its revenue streams.

On May 1, 2023, the first day of the Class Period, onsemi released its first quarter 2023 earnings and accompanying investor earnings call with equity analysts. During that call, Defendants spoke extensively on the growth of onsemi’s SiC business and touted the fact that the company has “more and more confidence” in its claim that it would reach $1 billion in annual revenue for its SiC products in 2023. Specifically, Defendants explained that onsemi’s outlook was “actually very, very predictable,” which was “the benefit that we’ve been talking about with the LTSAs that have us really, with our customers, align on pricing and volume through the duration of the LTSAs.”

Thereafter and throughout the Class Period, Defendants continued to tout onsemi’s sales of SiC products, particularly to EV manufacturers. Defendants lauded onsemi’s LTSAs for the “extended visibility” and the “very, very clear view of where demand is,” aiding Defendants in their ability to effectively manage changing macroeconomic conditions and sustain onsemi’s revenue growth targets. Indeed, Defendants consistently disclosed increasing expected revenue figures for every new LTSA onsemi had signed with customers and assured investors that the LTSAs built “a more strategic relationship and partnership” with onsemi’s customers. Thus, Defendants told investors that, if onsemi’s customers “have . . . softness in their market and they have an LTSA, we’re going to get the call 6 months in advance.”

Notwithstanding Defendants’ assurances, on October 30, 2023, before the market opened, investors began to learn the truth about the purported benefits of onsemi’s LTSA strategy and the achievability of projected revenue from the company’s products subject to LTSAs, when onsemi announced its third quarter 2023 financial results. During the investor earnings call held that day, Defendants disclosed to investors that onsemi was “taking a very cautious approach” with its SiC products due to signs of a weakening demand in the company’s automotive business segment (which generates between 75% and 90% of onsemi’s SiC revenues), while also revealing that onsemi would miss its $1 billion 2023 SiC revenue target by approximately $200 million. Defendants claimed that the approximately 20% reduction in onsemi’s expected SiC revenue was solely attributable to one customer (identified by many analysts as Tesla, Inc.). Defendants added, however, that onsemi expects “greater sequential declines in industrial and other end markets” as well.

On this news, the price of onsemi common stock plummeted $18.18 per share, or nearly 22%, from a close of $83.52 per share on October 27, 2023, to close at $65.34 per share on October 30, 2023.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the company’s business and operations. Specifically, Defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose that: (1) revenues from billions of dollars in reported LTSAs were “committed” and “locked in,” and were effectively certain to be obtained by onsemi when, in fact, onsemi could and would abrogate the LTSAs at a customer’s request; (2) LTSA’s provided “predictable” and “sustainable” performance to drive onsemi’s growth, even in tough macroeconomic conditions, when, in fact, they would be modified or eliminated as conditions changed; and (3) Defendants had “good visibility” into customer demand when, in fact, demand could be reduced on short notice, even where LTSAs were in effect. As a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about onsemi’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

For more information on the onsemi class action go to:


Class Period: March 30, 2022 - October 13, 2023

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 12, 2024

According to the filed complaint, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) BioNTech overstated demand for Comirnaty and/or its commercial prospects; (ii) the Company and/or Pfizer had accumulated excess inventory of raw materials for Comirnaty, as well as COVID-19 vaccine doses adapted to other, non-XBB.1.5 variants that were produced at risk; (iii) accordingly, BioNTech was at an increased risk of recording significant inventory write-offs and other charges related to Comirnaty; and (iv) as a result, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times.

For more information on the BioNTech class action go to:

BioVie Inc. (NASDAQ: BIVI)

Class Period: August 5, 2021 - November 29, 2023

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 19, 2024

On November 29, 2023, BioVie, Inc. issued a press release accompanying an investor presentation disclosing top line data from its clinical trial of NE3107 for the treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer’s Disease. The press release stated that the trial started during the COVID-19 pandemic when access to clinical sites was limited and enrolled a total of 439 patients through 39 sites. Upon trial completion, the Company found significant deviation from protocol and Good Clinical Practice (GCP) violations at 15 sites. This highly unusual level of suspected improprieties led the Company to exclude all patients from these sites and to refer them to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Scientific Investigations (OSI) for further action.

On a conference call that same day, Defendants announced that the Phase 3 clinical trial did not achieve statistical significance due to the number of patients being excluded from the trial that the Company believed engaged in improper practices.

On November 29, 2023, the Company’s share price fell $3.03 per share, or more than 60%, to close at $1.96 per share, on unusually high trading volume.

The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, it is alleged that Defendants misled investors by failing to disclose that (1) BioVie was not conducting proper oversight of its Phase 3 clinical trial; (2) that the COVID-19 pandemic significantly and negatively impacted the Company’s ability to adequately conduct proper oversight of the Phase 3 clinical trial; (3) that due to lack of proper oversight and reliance on contract research organizations, the data from Defendants’ Phase 3 clinical trial faced a greater risk of being unreliable and that the majority of patients would have to be excluded from the clinical trial; (4) that, as a result of the significant exclusions from the trial results, the Phase 3 clinical trial would fail to meet its primary endpoints; and (5) statements about BioVie’s business, operations, prospects, and compliance with current good clinical practices (“cGCP”) were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

For more information on the BioVie class action go to:

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 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

Primary Logo

Data & News supplied by
Stock quotes supplied by Barchart
Quotes delayed at least 20 minutes.
By accessing this page, you agree to the following
Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.
Photography by Christophe Tomatis
Copyright © 2010-2020 & California Media Partners, LLC. All rights reserved.