Get Cash Back and $0 Commissions + The Power of TradeStation
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Edison, Elastic, Intellia, and Merck and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm
Globe Newswire 25-Feb-2025 9:00 PM
NEW YORK, Feb. 25, 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 Edison International (NYSE:EIX), Elastic N.V. (NYSE:ESTC), Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ:NTLA), and Merck & Co., Inc. (NYSE:MRK). 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.
Class Period: February 25, 2021 - February 6, 2025
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: April 14, 2025
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Edison's claim that Southern California Edison Company ("SCE") used its Public Safety Power Shutoffs ("PSPS") program to "proactively de-energize power lines to mitigate the risk of catastrophic wildfires during extreme weather events", was false; (2) this resulted in heightened fire risk in California and heightened legal exposure to the Company; and (3) as a result, Defendants' statements about Edison's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Elastic had implemented significant changes to its sales operations, particularly with respect to its customer segments in the Americas; (2) the foregoing changes were likely to, and did, disrupt Elastic's sales operations during the first quarter of its FY 2025; (3) accordingly, Defendants had overstated the stability of Elastic's sales operations; (4) as a result of all the foregoing, Elastic was unlikely to meet its own previously issued revenue guidance for its FY 2025; and (5) as a result, Defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
According to the complaint, defendants provided investors with material information concerning Intellia's Phase 1/2 study evaluating NTLA-3001 for the treatment of alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD)-associated lung disease. Defendants' statements included, among other things, confidence in the Company's timeline for the aforementioned study, specifically that Intellia expected to dose the first patient in the second half of 2024. Defendants failed to disclose inter alia that the demand for viral-based editing was rapidly dwindling as non-viral delivery methods became a main target of the scientific research community due to their cost-effectiveness and more efficient development, thus making NTLA-3001 an inefficient program for Intellia to maintain.
The alleged truth emerged on January 9, 2025, when Intellia published a press release announcing Company reorganization. In pertinent part, defendants disclosed that Intellia would be halting all NTLA-3001 research and studies and that the Company would be reducing its workforce by 27% in 2025. Specifically, the Company announced that management decided to focus Intellia's resources on other pharmaceutical development and would be implementing cost saving in the form of a major reduction in force. As a result, defendants pipeline priority readjustment resulted in the Company's once-touted NTLA-3001's discontinuation.
Following this news, Intellia's stock price fell from a closing market price of $12.02 per share on January 8, 2025 to $10.20 per share on January 10, 2025.
The Merck 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 Merck's projected revenue outlook and anticipated growth of Gardasil while also minimizing risk from competition and drug approval development, such as China's approval to shift Gardasil to a 2-dose regimen; (ii) in truth, Merck's optimistic reports of growth, claims of successful consumer activation and education in China, overall ability to drive demand, and efforts to downplay the impact of competition on Gardasil fell short of the reality; and (iii) Merck's ability to push Gardasil in China had materially diminished.
The Merck class action lawsuit further alleges that on July 30, 2024, Merck revealed that in the second quarter of 2024 "there was a significant step down in shipments from our distributor and commercialization partner, Zhifei, into the points of vaccination, compared with prior quarters, resulting in above normal inventory levels at Zhifei." On this news, the price of Merck stock fell nearly 10%, according to the complaint.
Then, on February 4, 2025, the Merck class action lawsuit alleges that Merck published its fourth quarter fiscal year 2024 results, disclosing that "GARDASIL/GARDASIL 9 Sales Declined 3% to $8.6 Billion; Excluding the Impact of Foreign Exchange, Sales Declined 2%" "primarily due to lower demand in China, partially offset by higher demand in most international regions, particularly in Japan." On this news, the price of Merck stock fell more than 9%, according to the complaint.
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.
