Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Match, Credit Suisse, SVB, and Amgen and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm
News provided byBragar Eagel & Squire
Mar 17, 2023, 9:00 PM ET
NEW YORK, March 17, 2023 (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 Match Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: MTCH), Credit Suisse Group AG (NYSE: CS), SVB Financial Group (NASDAQ: SIVB, SIVBP), and Amgen Inc. (NASDAQ: AMGN). 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.
Match Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: MTCH)
Class Period: November 3, 2021 - January 31, 2023
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 5, 2023
Match is a technology and social media company that operates one of the world’s largest portfolios of online dating brands and apps. Match’s most notable dating apps include Tinder, Hinge, OkCupid, and PlentyOfFish. Tinder, which generated more than half of Match’s revenue during the Class Period, is Match’s largest and most important brand.
The Class Period begins on November 3, 2021, to coincide with Match’s announcement of its third quarter 2021 financial results after the market closed on November 2, 2021. In a letter to shareholders, Defendants touted Tinder’s “radical product transformation,” which included recently launched product initiatives such as a new “Explore” feature. Defendants further stated that “[t]he interactive and social experiences within Explore are the harbinger for Tinder’s long-term vision,” and noted that Tinder was working on several other monetization opportunities, such as an in-app virtual currency.
Throughout the Class Period, Defendants continued to represent that Tinder was effectively executing on several critical product initiatives that would drive growth for the Company in 2022 and beyond. For example, as recently as May 2022, Defendants assured investors that Tinder was “on track” with these product initiatives and “on schedule with what [Tinder] planned to deliver in 2022.”
Investors began to learn the truth on August 2, 2022, when the Company announced financial results for the second quarter of 2022 and warned that it expected Tinder’s growth to slow in the second half of 2022 as the result of poor product execution. Specifically, Defendants admitted that “Tinder did not deliver on its product roadmap for the first half of the year,” forcing the Company to delay the launch of several initiatives and optimizations that it had previously expected to generate growth in 2022.
On this news, the price of Match common stock declined $13.47 per share, or more than 17%, from a close of $76.71 per share on August 2, 2022, to close at $63.24 per share on August 3, 2022.
Despite these revelations, Defendants continued to assure investors that the Company had revamped the Tinder team and that the new team was successfully executing on the initiatives. For example, on November 1, 2022, Defendants assured investors that Tinder’s “[p]roduct execution is already improving” and that “early results are showing promise.”
However, on January 31, 2023, the Company reported disappointing financial results for 2022, including total revenue that missed the Company’s prior guidance. Defendants largely attributed the shortfall to “weaker-than-expected product execution at Tinder, the effects of which became more pronounced as the year progressed.” During an earnings conference call the following day, Defendants further admitted that Tinder had “decelerated as the year went on.”
On this news, the price of Match common stock declined $2.71 per share, or 5%, from a close of $54.12 per share on January 31, 2023, to close at $51.41 per share on February 1, 2023.
This 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) the Company was not effectively executing on Tinder’s new product initiatives; (2) as a result, the Company was not on track to deliver Tinder’s planned product initiatives in 2022; and (3) therefore, Defendants’ statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects lacked a reasonable basis.
As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the significant decline in the market value of the Company’s common stock when the truth was revealed, Plaintiff and other members of the Class (defined below) have suffered significant damages.
For more information on the Match class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/MTCH
Credit Suisse Group AG (NYSE: CS)
Class Period: March 10, 2022 and March 15, 2023
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 8, 2023
Credit Suisse, together with its subsidiaries, provides various financial services in Switzerland, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, the Americas, and Asia Pacific. The Company offers wealth management solutions, including investment advice and discretionary asset management services; risk management solutions, such as managed investment products; and wealth planning, succession planning, and trust services
In October 2022, Credit Suisse began experiencing a sharp increase in customer outflows, or withdrawals of client funds, after a series of quarterly losses and risk and compliance failures significantly decreased the Company’s American Depositary Share (“ADS”) price.
On December 1, 2022, Credit Suisse’s Chairman, Defendant Axel P. Lehmann (“Lehmann”) stated in an interview with Financial Times that customer outflows had not only “completely flattened out,” but had, in fact, “partially reversed.”
The following day, in an interview with Bloomberg Television, Defendant Lehmann reiterated his previous statements, reassuring investors that as of November 11, 2022, customer outflows had “basically stopped”.
Following Defendant Lehmann’s statements, Credit Suisse’s ADS price rose $0.29 per ADS, or 9.36%, to close at $3.38 per ADS on December 2, 2022.
Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) contrary to Defendant Lehmann’s representations in December 2022, the sharp increase in customer outflows Credit Suisse began experiencing in October 2022 remained ongoing; (ii) accordingly, Credit Suisse had downplayed the impact of the Company’s recent series of quarterly losses and risk and compliance failures on liquidity and its ability to retain client funds; (iii) as a result, Credit Suisse had overstated the Company’s financial position and/or prospects; and (iv) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On February 9, 2023, Credit Suisse issued a press release announcing its 2022 financial results. The press release revealed that, contrary to Defendant Lehmann’s prior statements, large customer outflows had continued through yearend 2022. Specifically, the press release reported customer outflows of 110.5 billion Swiss francs in the final three months of 2022, a figure which far exceeded market expectations.
On this news, Credit Suisse’s ADS price fell $0.56 per ADS, or 15.64%, to close at $3.02 per ADS on February 9, 2023.
Then, on February 21, 2023, Reuters reported that the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (“FINMA”), was reviewing Defendant Lehmann’s previous comments regarding customer outflows.
On this news, Credit Suisse’s ADS price fell another $0.10 per ADS, or 3.31%, to close at $2.92 per ADS on February 21, 2023.
As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company’s securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages.
For more information on the Credit Suisse class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/CS
SVB Financial Group (NASDAQ: SIVB, SIVBP)
Class Period: June 16, 2021 - March 10, 2023
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 12, 2023
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company failed to disclose to investors the risks resented by impending rising interest rates; (2) the Company failed to disclose to investors that, in an environment with high interest rates, it would be worse off than banks that did not cater to tech startups and venture capital-backed companies; (3) the Company failed to disclose that, if its investments were negatively affected by rising interest rates, it was particularly susceptible to a bank run; (4) as a result, Defendants' public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
For more information on the SVB class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/SIVB
Amgen Inc. (NASDAQ: AMGN)
Class Period: July 29, 2020 and April 27, 2022
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 12, 2023
Amgen is one of the world’s largest independent biopharmaceutical companies.
The Amgen class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the U.S. government claimed Amgen owed more than $3 billion in back taxes for tax years 2010, 2011, and 2012; (ii) the U.S. government claimed Amgen owed more than $5 billion in back taxes for tax years 2013, 2014, and 2015; (iii) the U.S. government would likely claim Amgen owed materially more to the U.S. government than investors had been led to believe for subsequent tax years for which Amgen had used the same profit allocation treatment between its U.S. and Puerto Rico operations; (iv) Amgen had not taken sufficient accruals to account for its outstanding tax liabilities; (v) Amgen had failed to comply with ASC 450 and other rules and regulations regarding the preparation of its periodic U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings; and (vi) Amgen’s refusal to pay taxes claimed by the U.S. government exposed Amgen to a substantial risk of severe financial penalties imposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”).
On August 3, 2021, Amgen issued an earnings release for its second fiscal quarter of 2021, which, for the first time, disclosed massive outstanding tax liabilities sought by the IRS. The release stated that Amgen had received a Notice of Deficiency from the IRS in July 2021 which sought $3.6 billion in back taxes, plus interest, for tax years 2010, 2011, and 2012. On this news, the price of Amgen common stock fell by more than 6%.
Then, on April 27, 2022, Amgen issued an earnings release for its first fiscal quarter of 2022, which disclosed that Amgen had received a Notice of Deficiency from the IRS in April 2022 which sought $5.1 billion in back taxes, plus interest, for tax years 2013, 2014, and 2015, and proposed a $2 billion penalty as a result of Amgen’s improper tax avoidance strategies. On this news, the price of Amgen common stock fell by an additional 4.3%, further damaging investors.
Amgen has additionally disclosed that it is under examination by the IRS for the years 2016 to 2018 for similar issues as the prior Notices of Deficiency for years 2010 to 2015, as well as examination by various state and foreign tax jurisdictions. Amgen has also admitted that “the ultimate outcome of any tax matters may result in payments substantially greater than amounts accrued and could have a material adverse effect on the results of our operations.”
For more information on the Amgen class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/AMGN
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.
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.