The Klein Law Firm Reminds Investors of Class Actions on Behalf of Shareholders of MAXR, BRS, WTW and CRBP

NEW YORK, March 14, 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.

Maxar Technologies Inc. (MAXR)
Class Period: March 29, 2018 to January 7, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 15, 2019

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period, Maxar Technologies Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Maxar improperly inflated the value of its intangible assets, among other accounting improprieties; (ii) Maxar’s highly-valued WorldView-4 was equipped with CMGs that were faulty and/or ill-suited for their designed and intended purpose; and (iii) as a result, Maxar’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

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

Bristow Group Inc. (BRS)
Class Period: February 8, 2018 to February 12, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: April 15, 2019

During the class period, Bristow Group Inc. allegedly made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Bristow lacked adequate monitoring processes related to non-financial covenants within its secured financing and lease agreements; (2) Bristow could not reasonably assure compliance with certain non-financial covenants; (3) Bristow was reasonably likely to breach certain agreements; (4) Bristow had understated its short-term debt; (5) the required corrections would materially impact financial statements; (6) there was a material weakness in Bristow’s internal controls over financial reporting; and (7) as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ positive statements about Bristow’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

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

Weight Watchers International, Inc. (WTW)
Class Period: May 4, 2018 to February 26, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 3, 2019

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period, Weight Watchers International, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (a) Weight Watchers was experiencing diminished subscriber demand attributable due to the onslaught of new competing smartphone fitness apps, meal-delivery services, and other tech advances was driving down Weight Watchers’ new subscriber growth and its subscriber retention rates; (b) diminished subscriber growth, when coupled with the much larger number of fourth quarter subscription lapses that Weight Watchers typically experiences, made it highly unlikely that the Company would retain four million subscribers by the end of 2018; (c) Weight Watchers was not on track to grow its subscriber count to five million or to drive annual revenues to more than $2 billion by the end-of-2020; (d) a decreased subscriber count would result in decreased revenues and profits; and (e) as a result, Defendants’ statements about Weight Watchers’ business metrics and financial prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

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

Corbus Pharmaceutical Holdings, Inc. (CRBP)
Class Period: November 14, 2016 to February 28, 2019
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 13, 2019

The lawsuit alleges that Corbus Pharmaceutical 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.