Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC remind investors of this class
NEW YORK, June 13, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC, a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class action lawsuits have been filed on behalf of shareholders of Verrica Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: VRCA), Apyx Medical Corporation (NASDAQ: APYX) and Waste Management, Inc. (NYSE: WM). Shareholders have until the deadlines below to ask the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information on each case can be found at the link provided.
Verrica Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: VRCA)
Course period: May 28, 2021 – May 24, 2022
Lead Applicant Deadline: August 5, 2022
In December 2020, Verrica submitted its New Drug Application (“NDA”) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) seeking regulatory approval of VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum .
On September 20, 2021, after market close, Verrica announced the receipt of a Complete Response Letter (“CRL”) due to deficiencies in a Verrica contract manufacturer facility under the company’s NDA .
Following this news, the company’s share price fell $1.00, or 8.3%, to close at $11.03 per share on September 21, 2021, on unusually high trading volume. raised.
In November 2021, Verrica resubmitted the NDA for VP-102, claiming “[t]The new submission addresses the successful resolution of inspection deficiencies” at the manufacturing plant.
Then, on May 24, 2022, after market close, Verrica announced receipt of another comprehensive response letter regarding NDA VP-102 citing “deficiencies identified during a general re-inspection of Sterling Pharmaceuticals Services, LLC ( Sterling), the contract manufacturing organization (CMO) that manufactures Verrica’s bulk solution drug.”
Following the news, shares of the company fell $3.55, or 63.8%, to close at $2.01 per share on May 25, 2022, on unusually high trading volume.
The Complaint filed in this Class Action alleges that throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, and failed to disclose material adverse facts regarding the business, operations and societal prospects. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that there were manufacturing defects in the facility where Verrica’s contract manufacturer produced bulk solution for VP-102; (2) that these deficiencies were not corrected when Verrica resubmitted its NDA for VP-102 for molluscum; (3) that the foregoing posed significant risks to Verrica obtaining regulatory approval for VP-102 for molluscum; and (4) that as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ positive statements about the company’s business, operations and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked reasonable basis.
For more information on the Verrica class action, please visit: https://bespc.com/cases/VRCA
Apyx Medical Corporation (NASDAQ:APYX)
Course period: May 12, 2021 – March 11, 2022
Lead Applicant Deadline: August 5, 2022
On March 14, 2022, Apyx announced that the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) would issue a Medical Device Safety Notice (“MDSC”) regarding the company’s advanced energy products. The Company further revealed that “[b]Based on our initial interactions with the FDA, we believe the Agency’s MDSC will relate to the use of our Advanced Energy products outside of their FDA-approved indication for general use in cutting, coagulation, and soft tissue removal during open and laparoscopic surgical procedures. .”
On this news, shares of the company fell $4.02, or 40.6%, to close at $5.88 per share on March 14, 2022, on unusually high trading volume.
The Complaint filed in this Class Action alleges that throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, and failed to disclose material adverse facts regarding the business, operations and societal prospects. Specifically, the defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that a significant number of Apyx’s Advanced Energy products were used for non-compliant indications; (2) that these off-label uses have resulted in an increase in the number of medical device reports filed by Apyx of serious adverse events; (3) that, as a result, the Company was reasonably likely to be subject to regulatory scrutiny; (4) that as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s financial results would be adversely affected; and (5) that as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ positive statements about the company’s business, operations and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked reasonable basis.
For more information on the Apyx class action, please visit: https://bespc.com/cases/APYX
Waste Management, Inc. (NYSE: WM)
Course period: February 13, 2020 – June 23, 2020
Lead Applicant Deadline: August 8, 2022
On April 14, 2019, Waste Management entered into an agreement and merger plan to acquire Advanced Disposal Services, Inc. for $4.9 billion, or $33.15 per share. The merger was conditional upon, among other things: (i) the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Advanced Disposal Services at a special meeting of shareholders of Advanced Disposal Services to be held on June 28, 2019 (which finally obtained); and (ii) obtaining antitrust clearance from regulatory authorities, including the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). Knowing that the transaction raised significant antitrust issues, Waste Management agreed in the merger agreement to divest up to $200 million of the combined companies’ revenue-generating assets over a 12-month period (the antitrust revenue threshold ).
Under the merger agreement, Waste Management retained full control of the trading strategy to obtain DOJ antitrust consent and was not obligated to divest any assets that exceeded the antitrust revenue threshold. Instead, Waste Management had the right to terminate the agreement for failing to obtain antitrust approval.
On May 14, 2019, Waste Management issued $4 billion of senior notes in a public offering to fund Waste Management’s acquisition of Advanced Disposal Services. All series have received an investment grade rating. As described in the notes’ final prospectus, four of the five series, aggregating $3 billion in principal, were subject to a special mandatory redemption (SMR) feature in the merger agreement. The SMR clause required Waste Management to repurchase the Notes for 101% of par in the event the merger was not completed by July 14, 2020, the end date under the merger agreement (the end date ).
In the notes’ prospectus, Waste Management indicated that the merger would close in the first quarter of 2020. And to address concerns raised by the DOJ, Waste Management and Advanced Disposal Services have entered into extensive negotiations with several potential divestiture buyers, including GFL Environmental, Inc., for disposing of assets well above the antitrust revenue threshold.
On June 24, 2020, Waste Management announced that it and Advanced Disposal Services had revised the terms of the merger and that Waste Management had to divest significantly more assets than previously disclosed to receive DOJ approval for the deal. Under the revised merger terms, Waste Management had agreed to buy Advanced Disposal Services for $4.6 billion, or $30.30 per share, reducing the cost of acquiring Waste Management by approximately $300 million. at $4.6 billion. Additionally, Waste Management and Advanced Disposal Services had agreed to sell $835 million in assets in an effort to satisfy antitrust regulators, which assets were responsible for generating approximately $345 million in revenue in 2019.
Notably, approximately $300 million of total asset and business revenue was sold to GFL Environmental, with whom Waste Management had been in protracted negotiations for months prior to the class action period. In addition, Waste Management disclosed that the agreement was no longer expected to close until the end of the third quarter of 2020, six months later than represented by the defendants at the start of the class period and, importantly, after the end date that triggered the Ticket SMR refund feature. Following this disclosure, ticket prices dropped significantly.
The Waste Management Class Action alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the DOJ advised Waste Management that would require Waste Management to divest itself of significantly more assets than the $200 million antitrust revenue threshold; (ii) as a result, the Merger would not be completed on the Completion Date; and (iii) the Notes would be subject to a mandatory redemption at 101% of par.
For more information on the Waste Management class action, go to: https://bespc.com/cases/WM
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC 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, derivatives and other complex litigation before state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the company, please visit www.bespc.com. Lawyer advertisement. Prior results do not guarantee similar results.
Bragar Eagel & Squire, CP
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.