Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC reminds investors that class action lawsuits have been filed against Tuya and LifeStance and encourages investors to contact the firm

News and research before you hear about it on CNBC and others. Claim your one week free trial for StreetInsider Premium here.

NEW YORK, Aug. 15, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC, a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class action lawsuits have been filed on behalf of shareholders of Tuya, Inc. (NYSE: TUYA) and LifeStance Health Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: LFST). Shareholders have until the deadlines below to ask the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information on each case can be found at the link provided.

Tuya, Inc. (NYSE: TUYA)

Class Period: In accordance with the Company’s IPO on March 18, 2021

Lead Applicant Deadline: October 11, 2022

According to the complaint, the company made false and misleading statements to the market. Tuya’s China-based customers engaged in a scheme to manipulate reviews and product listings on Amazon, in violation of the commerce platform’s terms of service. A consumer survey that took place before the IPO revealed fake scams organized by the company’s customers, which included 200,000 fake Amazon accounts that posted 13 million fake reviews. The company was likely to face significant business challenges if its customer base was prevented from selling on the Amazon platform. Based on these facts, the Company’s public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the IPO period. When the market learned the truth about Tuya, investors suffered damage.

For more information on the Tuya class action, please visit:

LifeStance Health Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: LFST)

Recourse period: in accordance with the company’s initial public offering on June 11, 2021

Lead Applicant Deadline: October 11, 2022

On or about June 11, 2021, LifeStance completed its IPO, issuing 46 million shares at $18 per share.

On August 11, 2021, LifeStance announced its financial results for the second quarter of 2021, which ended just days after the IPO. The company reported a net loss of $70 million and also disclosed that its operating expenses more than tripled in the second quarter. LifeStance said it experienced a “recent and significant shift in clinician retention levels.”

On this news, the Company’s share price fell $10.16, or 46%, to close at $11.71 per share on August 12, 2021, hurting investors.

Then, on November 8, 2021, LifeStance released its third quarter 2021 financial results, revealing that “[c]retention of linicians [had] stabilized at around 80% annualized in the third quarter” and that the company needed to increase spending on “improving clinician engagement and continued support for workplace and work life flexibility “.

As a result of this news, the company’s stock price fell $3.10, or 24%, to close at $9.73 per share on November 9, 2021, further hurting investors.

Then, on March 10, 2022, LifeStance released its fiscal year 2021 results, indicating that a recent study had shown that three-quarters of mental health patients preferred in-person services and that through 2021, telehealth tended to decline. Additionally, the Company said it will reduce the number of brick-and-mortar facilities it builds in the immediate future in order to increase its profitability.

At the time the complaint was filed, LifeStance common stock was trading up to 73% below the IPO price.

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that the defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, and failed to disclose material adverse facts regarding the company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the number of virtual visits clients undertook using LifeStance declined as COVID-19-related lockdowns were lifted, capping outpatient revenue growth /virtuals of the company; (2) that the percentage of in-person visits customers were undertaking using LifeStance increased as COVID-19 lockdowns were lifted, resulting in a substantial increase in the Company’s operating expenses; (3) that LifeStance had lost a large number of physicians to burnout and, as a result, its physician retention rate had fallen significantly below the 87% evidenced in the registration statement and the company had incurred additional costs to onboard new physicians who were less productive than the outgoing physicians they replaced; and (4) therefore, defendants’ positive statements about the company’s business, operations and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked reasonable basis at all relevant times.

For more information on the LifeStance class action, go to:

About Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivatives and other complex litigation before state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the company, please visit Lawyer advertisement. Prior results do not guarantee similar results.

Contact information:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, CP
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
[email protected]

Comments are closed.