04:30:17 EDT Thu 24 Sep 2020
Enter Symbol
or Name
USA
CA



Login ID:
Password:
Save

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Insperity, Energy Recovery, Wins Finance, and Guidewire Software and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm

2020-08-05 18:00 ET - News Release

NEW YORK, Aug. 05, 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 Insperity, Inc. (NYSE: NSP), Energy Recovery, Inc. (NASDAQ: ERII), Wins Finance Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: WINS), and Guidewire Software, Inc. (NYSE: GWRE).  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 provided.

Insperity, Inc. (NYSE: NSP)

Class Period: February 11, 2019 to February 11, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: September 21, 2020

On July 29, 2019, Insperity released its second quarter 2019 financial results. Despite delivering year-over-year growth and meeting analysts’ estimates, the Company offered disappointing third quarter 2019 guidance and reduced its full-year 2019 guidance. Further, defendants revealed that in the second quarter 2019, Insperity had experienced an increase in large medical claim costs, which defendants described as an anomaly which would not impact projected cost benefit trends.

On this news, Insperity shares fell $35.74 per share, or 25 percent.

On November 4, 2019, Insperity released its third quarter 2019 financial results, which substantially missed analysts’ estimates and were materially down year-over-year. In addition, Insperity materially reduced its full-year 2019 guidance. Defendants attributed these results to continued large medical claim costs, which they again attempted to describe as a mere anomaly to assuage investor concern.

On this news, Insperity shares fell by $36.29 per share, or 34 percent.

Finally, on February 11, 2020, after the close of trading, Insperity released its fourth quarter and full-year 2019 financial results. On this date, Insperity revealed that, for the third quarter in a row, large medical claims had again impacted the Company. Further, the Company stated that it had restructured its contract with UnitedHealthcare to no longer have financial responsibility for any medical claims over $1 million. Insperity also offered disappointingly bearish guidance for the first quarter and full-year 2020.

On this news, Insperity shares declined by $17.44 per share, or 20 percent.

The complaint, filed on July 21, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants failed to disclose, and would continue to omit, the following adverse facts pertaining to the Company’s business, operations, and financial condition, which were known to or recklessly disregarded by defendants: (i) the Company had failed to negotiate appropriate rates with its customers for employee benefit plans and did not adequately disclose the risk of large medical claims from these plans; (ii) Insperity was experiencing an adverse trend of large medical claims; (iii) as a mitigating measure, the Company would be forced to increase the cost of its employee benefit plans, causing stunted customer growth and reduced customer retention; and (iv) the foregoing issues were reasonably likely to, and would, materially impact Insperity’s financial results.

For more information on the Insperity securities class action case go to: https://bespc.com/NSP

Energy Recovery, Inc. (NASDAQ: ERII)

Class Period: August 2, 2017 to June 29, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: September 21, 2020

On October 19, 2015, the Company announced that it has signed a fifteen-year deal with Schlumberger Technology Corp. (“Schlumberger”), which gave Schlumberger the exclusive right to the use of the Company’s VorTeq technology (the “Schlumberger Licensing Agreement”). Under the terms of the Schlumberger Licensing Agreement, Schlumberger paid $75 million exclusivity fee and was to pay an additional $50 million milestone payments in 2016. The terms also dictated that Schlumberger would pay continuing annual royalties for the duration of the license agreement, subject to the satisfaction of certain key performance indicators.

On June 29, 2020 — not even five years into the Schlumberger License Agreement — the Company issued a press release, announcing the termination of the licensing agreement with Schlumberger, citing to “different strategic perspectives as to the path to VorTeq commercialization.” The Company further announced that following the termination, “no further payments will be made by either party” and that “Energy Recovery will now be fully responsible for commercialization of the VorTeq technology globally.”

This news caused a sharp decline in the price of Energy Recovery shares, which fell 15.8%, to close at $7.59 on June 30, 2020. Several securities analysts downgraded Energy Recovery’s rating and significantly lowered the Company’s price target. As one analyst commented, “[the Company] should have been able to perceive in advance and then explicitly warn about the significant, and likely rising, odds of this outcome.”

The complaint, filed on July 21, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and financial health. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose to investors that: (i) the Company and Schlumberger had different strategic perspectives regarding commercialization of VorTeq; (ii) which created substantial risk of early termination of the Company’s exclusive licensing agreement with Schlumberger; (iii) accordingly, the revenue guidance and expectations of future license revenue was false and lacked reasonable basis; and (iv) as a result, defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times or lacked a reasonable basis and omitted material facts.

For more information on the Energy Recovery class action go to: https://bespc.com/ERII

Wins Finance Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: WINS)

Class Period: October 31, 2018 to July 6, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: September 23, 2020

Wins, through its subsidiaries, purports to provide financing solutions for small and medium enterprises in the People’s Republic of China.  The Company purports to offer financial guarantees, as well as financial leasing, advisory, consultancy, and agency services in Jinzhong City, Shanxi Province, and Beijing.

In 2014, Wins entered into a RMB 580 million credit agreement with Guohong Asset Management Co., Ltd. (the “Guohong Loan”), pursuant to which Guohong’s repayment was due to Wins in October 2019.

In September 2017, Wins engaged Centurion ZD CPA & Co. (“CZD”) as its independent registered public accounting firm after dismissing its previous accounting firm.

On October 31, 2019, Wins filed a notification of inability to timely file Form 20-F on Form NT 20-F with the Securities and Exchange Commission(“SEC”) (the “2019 NT 20-F”).   

The following trading day, the Company’s stock price declined from $11.90 to $11.20, or 5.8%.

On November 19, 2019, Wins issued a press release announcing its receipt of a notification letter from the NASDAQ Listing Qualifications and its intent to submit a plan of compliance, adding that the filing of the 2019 20-F was untimely due to the uncertainty over recovery of the Guohong Loan but assuring investors that failure to collect on the loan would “not impact the Company’s ongoing operations.” 

Then, on May 26, 2020, Wins issued a press release announcing that the Company received a delisting determination letter from Nasdaq.  The press release stated, in relevant part, “[a]s disclosed previously, the Company is working assiduously to complete its delinquent filing with SEC and to regain compliance with the Nasdaq listing rule as soon as possible.”

On this news, Wins’s stock price closed at $7.81 per share on May 26, 2020, in contrast to its previous close of $10.06, a decline of 22.3%.

The Company’s undisclosed ongoing financial difficulties—including non-repayment of the Guohong Loan—and material control weaknesses came to a head on June 30, 2020, when CZD resigned as the Company’s independent auditor after less than three years in that role.  On July 6, 2020, Wins issued a press release announcing CZD’s resignation.

On this news, Wins’s stock price fell $2.06 per share, or 6.1%, to close at $31.70 per share on July 7, 2020.

The Complaint, filed on July 24, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational, and compliance policies.  Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the ultimate repayment of the RMB 580 million Guohong Loan was highly uncertain; (ii) nonpayment of the Guohong Loan would have a significant impact on the Company’s financial and operating condition; (iii) weaknesses in Wins’s internal control over its financial reporting persisted despite the Company’s repeated assurances to investors that it was taking steps to remediate these weaknesses; (iv) the foregoing issues, among others, made the resignation of Wins’s independent auditor foreseeably likely; and (v) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

For more information on the Wins Finance class action go to: https://bespc.com/WINS-2

Guidewire Software, Inc. (NYSE: GWRE)

Class Period: March 6, 2019 to March 4, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: September 23, 2020

Guidewire provides enterprise-level software systems for the property and casualty (“P&C”) insurance industry.  During the Class Period, defendants represented to investors that Guidewire was well-positioned to capitalize on a shift in the P&C insurance industry away from on-premise software systems to software systems provided over the cloud.  Defendants touted the “robust” demand that existed for Guidewire’s cloud-based products and assured investors that customer demand was “enduring and broad-based across most or all segments of the market.” Defendants further touted the demand for Guidewire’s cloud offering by reporting, at the end of each quarter, that cloud sales represented a substantial and growing percentage of the Company’s overall sales. The Company also issued highly favorable revenue and Annual Recurring Revenue (“ARR”) guidance, and assured investors that customer demand remained strong across the Company’s entire product offering, including its legacy on-premise business. 

On March 4, 2020, only three months after reiterating its strong revenue guidance for fiscal 2020, the truth about Guidewire’s failed cloud transition emerged.  In announcing its financial results for the second quarter of 2020, the Company was forced to slash its revenue guidance for fiscal year 2020 by $57 million, from a range of $759 million to $771 million down to $702 million to $714 million. Rather than forecasting a year-over-year revenue increase of up to 7% for fiscal 2020, the Company was now forecasting a substantial revenue decline of approximately 7.5%. The Company similarly lowered its critical ARR guidance to be between 11% and 12% in fiscal 2020, compared to its previous range of 14% to 16%.

On this news, Guidewire’s stock price plummeted by 17% in a single day, falling from $112.48 on March 3, 2020 to $93.56 on March 4, 2020, a decline of $18.92 per share.

The complaint, filed on July 24, 2020, alleges that the demand for Guidewire’s cloud products was weak and the Company’s transition to the cloud was not going well because Guidewire’s cloud-based products needed to be significantly improved to meet customer needs and catch-up with rival systems.  Further, Guidewire’s failed transition to the cloud was damaging the Company’s traditional on-premise business, as customers delayed purchasing decisions or declined to renew existing licenses.  As a result, Guidewire’s revenue guidance, including guidance principally based on significantly increasing demand for the Company’s cloud-based products, was baseless and unattainable.

For more information on the Guidewire class action go to: https://bespc.com/GWRE

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 www.bespc.com.  Attorney advertising.  Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. 

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

© 2020 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.