AP NEWS
This content is a press release from our partner Globe Newswire. The AP newsroom and editorial departments were not involved in its creation.
PRESS RELEASE from provider: Globe Newswire
This content is a press release from our partner Globe Newswire. The AP newsroom and editorial departments were not involved in its creation.

The Klein Law Firm Reminds Investors of Class Actions on Behalf of Shareholders of WBT, CMCM, SOGO and XRAY

January 24, 2019

NEW YORK, Jan. 24, 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.

Welbilt, Inc. (NYSE: WBT) Class Period: February 24, 2017 to November 2, 2018 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 11, 2019

During the class period, Welbilt, Inc. allegedly made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company lacked effective internal control over financial reporting; (ii) the Company was incorrectly recording the tax basis of foreign subsidiaries and the amortization of their intangible assets; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ statements about Welbilt’s business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On November 5, 2018, Welbilt filed a Form 8-K for its Q3 2018, stating that “During the third quarter of 2018, the Company identified errors in the tax basis of a foreign subsidiary and incorrect amortization of the intangible assets held by the same entity… In addition, the Company discovered certain intercompany transactions were not recorded on a timely basis.” As a result of these errors, Welbilt announced that “the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016 will be restated, and as of and for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2017 are expected to be revised.”

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

Cheetah Mobile Inc. (NYSE: CMCM) Class Period: April 21, 2015 to November 27, 2018 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: January 29, 2019

The lawsuit alleges that Cheetah Mobile Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Cheetah’s apps had undisclosed embedded features which tracked when users downloaded new apps; (ii) Cheetah used this data to inappropriately claim credit for having caused the downloads; (iii) the foregoing features, when discovered, would foreseeably subject the Company’s apps to removal from the Google Play store; (iv) accordingly, Cheetah’s Class Period revenues were in part the product of improper conduct and thus unsustainable; and (v) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

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

Sogou Inc. (NYSE: SOGO) Class Period: Purchasers of American Depositary Shares pursuant and/or traceable to Sogou’s false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s initial public offering on November 9, 2017 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 11, 2019

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period, Sogou Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Chinese regulators were analyzing Sogou for regulatory action because of an increase in Sogou merchants’ sales of counterfeit goods; (ii) Chinese regulators were analyzing Sogou for regulatory action because Sogou’s existing software, advertising procedures, personnel, and audit procedures were insufficient to safeguard against compliance violations with governing Chinese regulations, and would need to be updated, enhanced, and strengthened, thus resulting in increased expenses; (iii) Sogou’s cost of revenues were skyrocketing primarily because of significant increases in Traffic Acquisition Cost, which is a primary driver of Sogou’s cost of revenues, as Sogou was dealing with significant price inflation from increased competition; (iv) Sogou was going to alter its strategy concerning smart hardware and push the Company’s AI capabilities to increase product competitiveness; (v) as a result of altering its smart hardware strategy, Sogou had already decided to phase out non-AI-enabled hardware products, such as legacy models of Teemo Smart Watch, and transition to use products integrating AI technologies, which Sogou hoped would reduce its hardware revenue in the second half of 2018; and (vi) as a result of the foregoing, Sogou’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

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

Dentsply Sirona, Inc. (NASDAQ: XRAY) Class Period: (i) all persons who purchased the common stock of Dentsply Sirona, Inc. (NASDAQ: XRAY) between February 20, 2014 and August 7, 2018; (ii) all Dentsply International Inc. shareholders who held shares as of the record date of December 2, 2015 and were entitled to vote with respect to the Acquisition at the January 11, 2016 special meeting of Dentsply International Inc. shareholders; and (iii) all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Dentsply International in exchange for their shares of common stock of Sirona in connection with the Acquisition Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 19, 2019

According to the complaint, during the Class Period, Defendants attributed the Company’s financial performance to the Company’s “innovation,” “operational improvement efforts,” “new products,” and “continued investments in sales and marketing” and told investors that these factors helped the Company succeed despite the “highly competitive” market for its products. In reality, the Company’s financial results had been buoyed by an anticompetitive scheme among the Company’s three primary distributors that suppressed competition in the dental supply market and artificially inflated the price of dental supplies sold by Dentsply. Further, Defendants concealed that an exclusive distribution arrangement that Sirona had with one of its distributors, Patterson Companies, Inc. (“Patterson”), required Patterson to regularly make large minimum purchases regardless of demand and, as a result, by 2015, Patterson had been supplied with so much excess inventory that it could not be sold. This channel-stuffing rendered the Company’s reported sales, financial results and guidance materially false and misleading. In addition, the Company represented that it reported its financial statements, including its goodwill, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP. In fact, the Company’s reported goodwill was artificially inflated and not reported in accordance with GAAP because it did not reflect the financial impact of the anticompetitive scheme.

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

Your ability to share in any recovery doesn’t require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. There is no cost or obligation to you. If you suffered a loss during the class period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J. Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages provided.

J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:J. Klein, Esq.Empire State Building350 Fifth Avenue59th FloorNew York, NY 10118 jk@kleinstocklaw.com Telephone: (212) 616-4899Fax: (347) 558-9665 www.kleinstocklaw.com