The Klein Law Firm Reminds Investors of Class Actions on Behalf of Shareholders of EQBK, AOS, CLDR and PYX

NEW YORK, June 13, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The Klein Law Firm announces that class action complaints have been filed on behalf of shareholders of the following companies. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff.

Equity Bancshares, Inc. (EQBK)
Class Period: May 11, 2018 to April 22, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 12, 2019

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period, Equity Bancshares, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company lacked adequate internal controls to assess credit risk; (2) as a result, certain of the Company’s loans posed an increased risk of loss; (3) as a result, the Company was reasonably likely to incur significant losses for certain substandard loans; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

Get additional information about the EQBK lawsuit: http://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/equity-bancshares-inc-loss-submission-form?wire=3

A. O. Smith Corporation (AOS)
Class Period: July 26, 2016 to May 16, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 29, 2019

Throughout the class period, A. O. Smith Corporation allegedly made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (a) A.O. Smith had undisclosed business connections and entanglements with UTP through which it funneled up to 75% of its China product sales; (b) A.O. Smith had used UTP to engage in channel stuffing by artificially inflating inventories purportedly sold through distributors that were not based on consumer demand, thereby approximately doubling the normal level of inventory at such distributors; (c) A.O. Smith had used its UTP relationship to artificially inflate the sales figures it reported to investors by as much as 8% and to conceal worsening sales trends that the Company was experiencing in China; (d) A.O. Smith’s sales growth had been primarily in lower margin products as its higher priced products were being undercut by competition in “second-tier” Chinese cities, causing the Company to experience significant margin pressures; (e) A.O. Smith had increased its cash reserves in China to over $530 million in furtherance of its channel stuffing and sales manipulation scheme, encumbering the Company’s ability to repatriate the cash or use it for capital expenditures; and (f) as a result of (a)-(e) above, A.O. Smith’s business, operations, and prospects were significantly worse than publicly represented and the Company was poised for sales and earnings declines in China, its most important international market.

Get additional information about the AOS lawsuit: http://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/a-o-smith-corporation-loss-submission-form?wire=3

Cloudera, Inc. (CLDR)
Class Period: April 28, 2017 to June 5, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: August 6, 2019

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period Cloudera, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Cloudera was finding it increasingly difficult to identify large enterprises interested in adopting the Company’s Hadoop-based  platform; (ii) Cloudera needed to expend an increasing amount of capital on sales and marketing activities to generate new revenues, even as new revenue opportunities were diminishing; and (iii) Cloudera had materially diminished sales opportunities and prospects and could not generate annual positive cash flows.

Get additional information about the CLDR lawsuit: http://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/cloudera-inc-loss-submission-form?wire=3

Pyxus International, Inc.  (PYX)
Class Period: on behalf of stockholders who purchased Pyxus (f/k/a Alliance One International, Inc. (AOI)) securities between June 7, 2018 and November 8, 2018, inclusive.
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: August 6, 2019

The complaint alleges Pyxus International, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company was experiencing longer shipping cycles; (2) as a result, the Company’s financial results would be materially affected; (3) the Company lacked adequate internal control over financial reporting; (4) the Company’s accounting policies were reasonably likely to lead to regulatory scrutiny; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.