CLASS ACTION UPDATE for SPB, USX, CRBP and APYX: Levi & Korsinsky, LLP Reminds Investors of Class Actions on Behalf of Shareholders

NEW YORK, April 19, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that class action lawsuits have commenced on behalf of shareholders of the following publicly-traded companies. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the deadlines listed to petition the court and further details about the cases can be found at the links provided. There is no cost or obligation to you.

Spectrum Brands Legacy, Inc. (f/k/a Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc.) (SPB)
Class Period: June 14, 2016 - April 25, 2018
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 6, 2019
Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/spectrum-brands-holdings-inc-loss-form?wire=3

The lawsuit alleges: Spectrum Brands Legacy, Inc. (f/k/a Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc.) made materially false and/or misleading statements throughout the class period and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Spectrum had been self-inflicting the operational issues at its Ohio and Kansas facilities; (ii) these operational issues were, in fact, recurring in nature; (iii) these operational issues would continuously impact production, shipping levels and sales; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

To learn more about the Spectrum Brands Legacy, Inc. (f/k/a Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc.) class action contact [email protected].

U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc. (USX)
Class Period: Purchasers of common stock pursuant/and or traceable to the initial public offering completed in June 2018
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 10, 2019
Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/u-s-xpress-enterprises-inc-loss-form-2?wire=3

The complaint alleges that the Offering Documents failed to disclose that: (1) a shortage of trucks was negatively impacting U.S. Xpress’s dedicated division; (2) (a) certain shipping patterns had been performing differently than expected and, as a result, (b) utilization, driver retention and hiring were being negatively affected, and as a result, (c) U.S. Xpress’s dedicated accounts, including one large account, were being negatively impacted; and as a result, (d) U.S. Xpress’s OTR division was providing continued support to the dedicated division; (3) (a) U.S. Xpress failed to stay informed regarding two large liability events; and as a result (b) U.S. Xpress’s insurance claim expense was understated; and (4) U.S. Xpress’s cost per mile for driver wages and independent contractors was exceeding the Company’s internal expectations.

To learn more about the U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc. class action contact [email protected].

Corbus Pharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc. (CRBP)
Class Period: November 14, 2016 - February 28, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 13, 2019
Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/corbus-pharmaceutical-holdings-inc-loss-form?wire=3

The lawsuit alleges: Corbus Pharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Corbus improperly changed the primary efficacy endpoint for the clinical study of its drug candidate, Lenabasum, after the results were unblinded to Corbus; (2) Corbus reported a one-sided p value, not the traditional two-sided p value normally reported in clinical trials, in an effort to conceal the fact that the study results did not have statistical significance; and (3) as a result, Corbus’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To learn more about the Corbus Pharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc. class action contact [email protected].

Apyx Medical Corporation (APYX)
Class Period: August 1, 2018 - April 1, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: June 17, 2019
Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/apyx-medical-corporation-loss-form?wire=3

The lawsuit alleges: Apyx Medical Corporation made materially false and/or misleading statements throughout the class period and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the clinical study on the use of J-Plasma for dermal resurfacing had not met its primary efficacy endpoint; (2) as a result, the clinical study did not support the Company’s application for regulatory clearance; (3) as a result, the Company was unlikely to receive regulatory approval of J-Plasma for dermal resurfacing; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.