Churchill Capital Corp IV (NASDAQ: CCIV), RLX Technology Inc. (NYSE: RLX), ChemoCentryx Inc. (NASDAQ: CCXI), and Ocugen Inc. (NASDAQ: OCGN) are all facing lawsuits by different law firms on behalf of shareholders for possible securities laws violation.
Ocugen, Churchill capital, and ChemoCentryx under investigation
Jakubowitz Law, The Portnoy law firm, and The Schall Law firm are investigating Ocugen on behalf of investors that acquired the company’s shares between February 2, 2021, and June 2, 2021. The investigation focuses on the alleged misleading or false statement regarding the anticipated EUA submission for COVAXIN in June 2021. In addition, the Schall Law firm has reminded investors having losses of over $500,000 to contact them before August 17, 2021.
Churchill Capital is also under investigation by Jakubowitz Law for making a misleading statement about the preparedness of Lucid to deliver vehicles this year. Lucid’s positive statement about vehicle production was misleading ahead of the merger with Churchill Capital.
ChemoCentryx is under probe from The Law Officer of Frank Cruz, The Schall Law firm, and the Jakubowitz Law on behalf of shareholders that bought the company’s common shares between November 26, 2019, and May 6, 2021. The law firms are investigating the company regarding Phase II ADVOCATE study, which the company designed to bring issues in interpretability of trial data to define avacopan’s clinical benefit.
Pomerantz investigation RLX technology and Provention Bio
Pomerantz LLP, Portnoy Law Firm, and Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP investigate RLX Technology on behalf of shareholders who bought the company’s American Depositary Shares pursuant to the January 2021 IPO. Shareholders have up to August 9, 2021, to contact the firms.
Provention Bio is also facing an investigation from The Schall Law firm and Pomerantz LLP on behalf of investors that bought the company’s shares between November 2, 2020, and April 2021. The company is accused of making misleading statements regarding teplizumab’s BLA, which lacked evidence; thus, the company overstated the drug’s potential approval.