The complaint filed in this class action 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, operations, and prospects.  Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants failed to disclose: (1) that the company was struggling to transition its mission and differentiate itself from Apple Inc. and other competitors; (2) that, as such, the company was experiencing increased competition; (3) that, as a result, demand and sell-through for the company's existing and new products were being negatively impacted; (4) that, as a result, the company's sales and financial results were weakening, and growth was slowing; (5) that the company's financial guidance was overstated; and (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants statements during the Class Period about Fitbit's business, operations, financial results and prospects, were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) India Globalization's business model was in a state of change in order to lure potential blockchain and cannabis investors; (2) India Globalization had overstated the benefits of its relationships with manufacturers, partners, and distributors in order to inflate its potential commercial success in the blockchain and cannabis markets; (3) as a result, the New York Stock Exchange delisted India Globalization's shares from its exchange; and (4) consequently, defendants' statements about India Globalization's business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.  

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period defendants made materially false and misleading statements and failed to disclose to investors: (i) that Latin American assets acquired by the company lacked adequate licenses to operate and were overvalued; and (ii) that the acquisition of Latin American assets would enrich the company's CEO and other insiders at the expense of shareholders.  The complaint further alleges that, as a result of the foregoing, investors purchased Aphria's securities at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period and suffered investment losses as a result of defendants' conduct.

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a New York-based law firm concentrating in commercial and securities litigation.  For additional information about Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. please go to www.bespc.com.  Attorney advertising.  Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. 

Contacts
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
[email protected]
www.bespc.com