Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC remind investors of this class
NEW YORK, Oct. 26, 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 Opendoor Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: OPEN), Schmitt Industries, Inc. (NASDAQ: SMIT) and Block, Inc. (NYSE: SQ). 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.
Opendoor Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: OPEN)
Class Period: December 21, 2020 to September 16, 2022 or pursuant to the Company’s IPO on December 21, 2020
Lead Applicant Deadline: December 6, 2022
Opendoor was formerly known as Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp. II (“SCH”) and operated as a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (“SPAC”), also known as a Blank Check Company, which is a development-stage company that does not have a specific business plan or objective or has indicated that its business plan is to engage in a merger or acquisition with an unidentified company or companies, other entity or person.
On September 15, 2020, the Company, then still operating as SCH, and Legacy Opendoor, a private company operating as a digital platform for residential real estate, announced that they had entered into a definitive agreement for the Merger (l ‘”Merger Agreement”), which valued Legacy Opendoor at an enterprise value of $4.8 billion.
On October 5, 2020, the Company filed a registration statement on Form S-4 with the SEC in connection with the Merger, which, after several amendments, was declared effective by the SEC on November 27, 2020 (the “ Registration Statement”). On November 30, 2020, the Company filed a proxy statement/prospectus on Form 424B3 with the SEC in connection with the Merger, which formed part of the Registration Statement (the “Proxy” and, together with the of registration, the “Offering Documents”).
On December 18, 2020, pursuant to the merger agreement, the company, among other things, de-registered as a Cayman Islands company, registered as a Delaware company, changed its name to “Opendoor Technologies Inc.” , and consummated the merger, whereby, among other things, Legacy Opendoor became a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company.
Following the merger, the company operated a digital platform for buying and selling residential real estate in the United States. The company’s platform includes a technology known as “iBuying,” which is an algorithm-based process that allegedly allows Opendoor to make sellers offers for their homes and then return those homes to buyers for a profit.
On December 21, 2020, the Company’s common stock and post-merger warrants began publicly trading on the Nasdaq Stock Exchange (“NASDAQ”) under the symbols “OPEN” and “OPENW”, respectively.
On September 19, 2022, citing a review of industry data, Bloomberg reported that the company appeared to have lost money on 42% of its transactions in August 2022 (measured by the prices at which it bought and sold properties). Bloomberg further reported that the data was even worse in key markets such as Los Angeles, California, where Opendoor lost money on 55% of sales, and Phoenix, Arizona, where it lost money. on 76% of sales. Worse still, a global real estate technology strategist interviewed by BloombergMike DelPrete, predicted that, based on his analysis, September would likely be even worse for Opendoor than August. BloombergOpendoor’s findings highlighted the inability of Opendoor’s algorithm to accurately adapt to changing market conditions.
Following the Bloomberg report, Opendoor’s stock price fell $0.50 per share, or 12.32%, over the following two trading sessions, to close at $3.56 per share on September 20, 2022 – a 88.61% decline from the Company’s first post-merger closing share price of $31.25 per share on December 21, 2020 (the “Initial Closing Price”).
At the time the lawsuit was filed, Opendoor common stock was trading significantly below the original closing price and continues to trade below its original merger value, hurting investors.
According to the complaint, the offer documents for the merger were negligently prepared and, as a result, contained misrepresentations of material facts or failed to state other facts necessary for the statements made not to be misleading and not misleading. have not been prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations governing their preparation. In addition, throughout the Class Period, Defendants have made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Offering Documents and the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the algorithm (“Algorithm”) used by the Company to make offers for homes could not accurately adapt to changing house prices through different market conditions and economic cycles; (ii) as a result, the Company was exposed to an increased risk of sustaining significant and repeated losses due to fluctuations in residential property prices; (iii) as a result, the Defendants overestimated the alleged advantages and competitive advantages of the Algorithm; and (iv) as a result, the Defendants’ offering documents and public statements throughout the Class Period were materially false and/or misleading and did not contain the information that should be contained therein.
For more information on the Opendoor class action, please visit: https://bespc.com/cases/OPEN
Schmitt Industries, Inc. (NASDAQ:SMIT)
Course period: September 1, 2020 – September 20, 2022
Lead Applicant Deadline: December 12, 2022
On September 20, 2022, after the market closed, Schmitt announced that its previous financial statements “should no longer be relied upon” and would require restatement, believing that “the errors were cumulatively material, resulting in an understatement of $330,203 of expenses for the first three quarters of the fiscal year.
On this news, Schmitt stock fell $0.68, or 17.9%, to close at $3.12 per share on September 21, 2022, hurting investors.
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Schmitt Industries consistently downplayed its serious internal control issues; (2) Schmitt Industries’ financial statements from August 31, 2021 to present contained “certain errors”; (3) as a result, Schmitt Industries should restate its previously filed financial statements for certain periods; and (4) as a result, defendants’ statements regarding its business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked reasonable basis at all relevant times.
For more information on the Schmitt class action, please visit: https://bespc.com/cases/SMIT
Block, Inc. (NYSE:SQ)
Course period: November 4, 2021 and April 4, 2022
Lead Applicant Deadline: December 12, 2022
Block, formerly known as Square, Inc., is a technology company that builds financial services tools. Block’s segments include Square, which provides financial tools for sellers, and Cash App, which provides financial tools for individuals.
On April 4, 2022, Block announced that a former employee improperly downloaded certain reports from Block’s subsidiary, Cash App Investing, on December 10, 2021. Information in the reports included full client names and phone numbers. brokerage account, as well as the value of the portfolio. , brokerage portfolio and/or stock trading activity. No less than 8.2 million Cash App Investing customers have been affected. Prior to April 4, 2022, Block had not disclosed this information to shareholders.
At this news, Block’s stock price fell more than 6%, hurting investors.
The Block class action alleges that the defendants throughout the class action period failed to disclose the following: (i) Block did not have adequate protocols in place limiting access to sensitive customer information; (ii) as a result, a former employee was able to download certain reports from Block’s subsidiary, Cash App Investing, containing the full names of clients and brokerage account numbers, as well as the value of the brokerage portfolio, the holdings of the brokerage portfolio and/or stock trading activity; and (iii) as a result, Block was reasonably likely to suffer material harm, including damage to its reputation.
For more information on the Block class action, please visit: https://bespc.com/cases/SQ
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.