Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Precigen, Royal Caribbean, Mesoblast, and Loop…

By daniellenierenberg

NEW YORK, Nov. 04, 2020 (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 Precigen, Inc. f/k/a Intrexon Corporation (NASDAQ: PGEN; XON), Royal Caribbean Group (NYSE: RCL), Mesoblast Limited (NASDAQ: MESO), and Loop Industries, Inc. (NASDAQ: LOOP). 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

Precigen, Inc. f/k/a Intrexon Corporation (NASDAQ: PGEN; XON)

Class Period: May 10, 2017 to September 25, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 4, 2020

On September 25, 2020, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a cease and desist order against Precigen. The cease and desist order involved inaccurate reports concerning the companys purported success converting relatively inexpensive natural gas into more expensive industrial chemicals using a proprietary methane bioconversion (MBC) program. The order noted that the Company was primarily using significantly more expensive pure methane for the relevant laboratory experiments but was indicating that the results had been achieved using natural gas. The cease-and-desist order further stated that although the Company pitched the MBC program privately to numerous potential business partners over the course of 2017 and 2018 and [a] number of these potential partners performed due diligence on the MBC program including reviewing lab results and plans for commercialization. [The Company] has not yet found a partner for the MBC program.

The complaint, filed on October 5, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose to investors that: (1) the Company was using pure methane as feedstock for its announced yields for its methanotroph bioconversion platform instead of natural gas; (2) yields from natural gas as a feedstock were substantially lower than the aforementioned pure methane yields; (3) due to the substantial price difference between pure methane and natural gas, pure methane was not a commercially viable feedstock; (4) the Companys financial statements for the quarter ended March 31, 2018 were false and could not be relied upon; (5) the Company had material weaknesses in its internal controls over financial reporting; (6) the Company was under investigation by the SEC since October 2018; and (7) as a result of the foregoing, defendants public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

For more information on the Precigen class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/PGEN

Royal Caribbean Group (NYSE: RCL)

Class Period: February 4, 2020 to March 17, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 7, 2020

The complaint, filed on October 7, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants failed to disclose material facts about the Companys decrease in bookings outside China, instead maintaining that it was only experiencing a slowdown in bookings from China. The Action further alleges that defendants failed to disclose material facts about the Companys inadequate policies and procedures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 on its ships. The truth about the scope of the impact that COVID-19 had on the Companys overall bookings and the inability of Royal Caribbean to prevent the virus spread on its ships was revealed through a series of disclosures.

First, on February 13, 2020, Royal Caribbean issued a press release stating that it had canceled 18 voyages in Southeast Asia due to recent travel restrictions and further warning that recent bookings had been softer for its broader business.

On this news, Royal Caribbean shares fell over 3 percent.

Second, on February 25, 2020, Royal Caribbean filed its 2019 Form 10-K, indicating that COVID-19 concerns were negatively impacting its overall business.

On this news, Royal Caribbean shares fell over 14 percent.

Third, on March 10, 2020, Royal Caribbean withdrew its 2020 financial guidance, increased its revolving credit facility by $550 million, and announced that it would take cost-cutting actions due to the proliferation of COVID-19, further revealing that COVID-19 was severely impacting Royal Caribbeans 2020 customer booking and that its safety measures were inadequate to prevent the spread of the virus on its ships.

On this news, Royal Caribbean shares fell over 14 percent.

Fourth, on March 11, 2020, Royal Caribbeans largest competitor, Carnival, announced a 60-day suspension of all operations, prompting concern that Royal Caribbean would follow suit. At the same time, Royal Caribbean also cancelled two cruises, beginning a series of cancellations and suspensions to follow.

On this news, Royal Caribbean shares fell almost 32 percent.

Fifth, on March 14, 2020, Royal Caribbean announced a suspension of all global cruises for 30 days.

On this news, Royal Caribbean stock fell over 7 percent.

Sixth, on March 16, 2020, the Company revealed that global operations could be suspended longer than anticipated, announcing the cancellations of two additional cruises throughout April and into May.

On this news, Royal Caribbean shares fell over 7 percent.

Finally, on March 18, 2020, analysts downgraded Royal Caribbeans stock and slashed their price targets.

On this news, Royal Caribbean shares fell more than 19 percent.

For more information on the Royal Caribbean class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/RCL

Mesoblast Limited (NASDAQ: MESO)

Class Period: April 16, 2019 to October 1, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 7, 2020

Mesoblast develops allogeneic cellular medicines using its proprietary mesenchymal lineage cell therapy platform. Its lead product candidate, RYONCIL (remestemcel-L), is an investigational therapy comprising mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow. In February 2018, the Company announced that remestemcel-L met its primary endpoint in a Phase 3 trial to treat children with steroid refractory acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD).

In early 2020, Mesoblast completed its rolling submission of its Biologics License Application (BLA) with the FDA to secure marketing authorization to commercialize remestemcel-L for children with steroid refractory aGVHD.

On August 11, 2020, the FDA released briefing materials for its Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) meeting to be held on August 13, 2020. Therein, the FDA stated that Mesoblast provided post hoc analyses of other studies to further establish the appropriateness of 45% as the null Day-28 ORR for its primary endpoint. The briefing materials stated that, due to design differences between these historical studies and Mesoblasts submitted study, it is unclear that these study results are relevant to the proposed indication.

On this news, the Companys share price fell $6.09, or approximately 35%, to close at $11.33 per share on August 11, 2020.

On October 1, 2020, Mesoblast disclosed that it had received a Complete Response Letter (CRL) from the FDA regarding its marketing application for remestemcel-L for treatment of SR-aGVHD in pediatric patients. According to the CRL, the FDA recommended that the Company conduct at least one additional randomized, controlled study in adults and/or children to provide further evidence of the effectiveness of remestemcel-L for SR-aGVHD. The CRL also identified a need for further scientific rationale to demonstrate the relationship of potency measurements to the products biologic activity.

On this news, the Companys share price fell $6.56, or 35%, to close at $12.03 per share on October 2, 2020.

The complaint, filed on October 8, 2020, 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 Companys business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that comparative analyses between Mesoblasts Phase 3 trial and three historical studies did not support the effectiveness of remestemcel-L for steroid refractory aGVHD due to design differences between the four studies; (2) that, as a result, the FDA was reasonably likely to require further clinical studies; (3) that, as a result, the commercialization of remestemcel-L in the U.S. was likely to be delayed; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants positive statements about the Companys business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

For more information on the Mesoblast class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/MESO

Loop Industries, Inc. (NASDAQ: LOOP)

Class Period: September 24, 2018 to October 12, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 14, 2020

On October 13, 2020, Hindenburg Research published a report alleging, among other things, that Loops scientists, under pressure from CEO Daniel Solomita, were tacitly encouraged to lie about the results of the companys process internally. The report also stated that Loops previous claims of breaking PET down to its base chemicals at a recovery rate of 100% were technically and industrially impossible, according to a former employee. Moreover, the report alleged that Executives from a division of key partner Thyssenkrupp, who Loop entered into a global alliance agreement with in December 2018, told us their partnership is on indefinite hold and that Loop underestimated both costs and complexities of its process.

On this news, the Companys share price fell $3.78, or over 32%, to close at $7.83 per share on October 13, 2020.

The complaint, filed on October 13, 2020, 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 Companys business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that Loop scientists were encouraged to misrepresent the results of Loops purportedly proprietary process; (2) that Loop did not have the technology to break PET down to its base chemicals at a recovery rate of 100%; (3) that, as a result, the Company was unlikely to realize the purported benefits of Loops announced partnerships with Indorama and Thyssenkrupp; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants positive statements about the Companys business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

For more information on the Loop class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/Loop

About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York and California. 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 http://www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.Brandon Walker, Esq. Melissa Fortunato, Esq.Marion Passmore, Esq.(212) 355-4648investigations@bespc.comwww.bespc.com

Go here to see the original:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Precigen, Royal Caribbean, Mesoblast, and Loop...