NEW YORK, April 02, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP reminds investors that class action lawsuits have been filed on behalf of stockholders of Ebix, Inc., Ontrak, Inc., Renewable Energy Group, Inc., and XL Fleet Corp. Investors have until the deadlines below to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.   Additional information about each case can be found at the links provided below.

Ebix, Inc. (“Ebix” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: EBIX)

Class Period: November 9, 2020 to February 19, 2021

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: April 23, 2021

On February 19, 2021, after the market closed, Ebix revealed that its independent auditor, RSM US LLP (“RSM”), resigned “as a result of being unable, despite repeated inquiries, to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that would allow it to evaluate the business purpose of significant unusual transactions that occurred in the fourth quarter of 2020” related to the Company’s gift card business in India. RSM had also stated that there was a material weakness related to Ebix’s failure to design controls “over the gift or prepaid card revenue transaction cycle sufficient to prevent or detect a material misstatement.” In addition, Ebix and RSM disagreed over the accounting treatment of $30 million that had been transferred into a commingled trust account of Ebix’s outside legal counsel in December 2020.

On this news, the Company’s share price declined by $20.24 per share, or approximately 40%, to close at $30.50 per share on February 22, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume.

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that there was insufficient audit evidence to determine the business purpose of certain significant unusual transactions in Ebix’s gift card business in India during the fourth quarter of 2020; (2) that there was a material weakness in the Company’s internal controls over the gift or prepaid revenue transaction cycle; and (3) that the Company’s independent auditor was reasonably likely to resign over disagreements with Ebix regarding $30 million that had been transferred into a commingled trust account of Ebix’s outside legal counsel; and (4) that, 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.

For additional information on the Ebix lawsuit please visit this website.

Ontrak, Inc. (“Ontrak” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: OTRK)

Class Period: November 5, 2020 to February 26, 2021

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 3, 2021

On March 1, 2021, Ontrak issued a press release announcing preliminary financial results for the fourth quarter and full year 2020. Therein, the Company stated that its largest customer had terminated its contract with Ontrak, effective June 26, 2021. The Company stated that this customer “evaluated Ontrak on a provider basis” and “[a]s such, the customer evaluated [Ontrak’s] performance based on [its] ability to achieve the lowest possible cost per medical visit, and not on [its] clinical outcomes data or medical cost savings.” The Company also stated that “the coaching model which Ontrak has pioneered for over a decade was seen by the customer to be less relevant to their performance metrics.”

On this news, the Company’s share price declined by $27.32 per share, or approximately 46.4%, to close at $31.62 per share on March 1, 2021, thereby injuring investors.

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that Ontrak’s largest customer evaluated the Company on a provider basis, valuing Ontrak’s performance based on achieving the lowest cost per medical visit rather than clinical outcomes or medical cost savings; (2) that, as a result, Ontrak’s largest customer did not find the Company’s program to be effective and was reasonably likely to terminate its contract with Ontrak; (3) that, because this customer accounted for a significant portion of the Company’s revenue, the loss of the customer would have an outsized impact on Ontrak’s financial results; and (4) that, 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.

For additional information on the Ontrak lawsuit please visit this website.

Renewable Energy Group, Inc. (“Renewable Energy” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: REGI)

Class Period: May 3, 2018 to February 25, 2021

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 3, 2021

On February 25, 2021, after the market closed, Renewable Energy issued a press release announcing its fourth quarter and full year 2020 financial results. Therein, the Company revealed that it would restate “$38.2 million in cumulative revenue from January 2018 through September 30, 2020” because Renewable Energy was not the “proper claimant for certain BTC payments on biodiesel it sold between January 1, 2017 and September 30, 2020.” Renewable Energy further stated that it had reached an agreement with the Internal Revenue Service “on a $40.5 million assessment, excluding interest” to correct these claims. On this news, the Company’s share price declined by $8.17 per share, or approximately 9.5%, to close at $77.77 per share on February 26, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume.

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that due to failures in the diesel additive system, petroleum diesel was not periodically added to certain loads by the Company and was instead added by the Company’s customers; (2) that, as a result, Renewable Energy was not the proper claimant for certain BTC payments on biodiesel it sold between January 1, 2017 and September 30, 2020; (3) that, as a result, Renewable Energy’s revenue and net income were overstated for certain periods; (4) that there was a material weakness in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting related to the purchase and use of the petroleum diesel gallons when blending with biodiesel; and (5) that, 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.

For additional information on the Renewable Energy lawsuit please visit this website.

XL Fleet Corp. (“XL” or the “Company”) (NYSE: XL)

Class Period: October 2, 2020 to March 2, 2021

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: May 7, 2021

On March 3, 2021, Muddy Waters Research published a report entitled “XL Fleet Corp. (NYSE: XL): More SPAC Trash,” alleging, among other things, that salespeople “were pressured to inflate their sales pipelines materially in order to mislead XL’s board and investors” and that “customer reorder rates are in reality quite low” due to “poor performance and regulatory issues.” Citing interviews with former employees, the report alleged that “at least 18 of 33 customers XL featured were inactive.” Muddy Waters also claimed that XL has “weak technology” and that “XL’s announcement of future class 7-8 upfits seems highly promotional” because the task is “too technologically complex for XL engineers to deliver on the promised timeline.” On this news, the Company’s stock price declined by $2.09 per share, or approximately 13%, to close at $13.86 per share on March 3, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume. The share price continued to decline by $2.69 per share, or approximately 19.4%, over two consecutive trading days to close at $11.17 per share on March 5, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume.

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that XL Fleet’s salespeople were pressured to inflate their sales pipelines to boost the Company’s reported sales and backlog; (2) that at least 18 of the 33 customers that XL featured were inactive and had not placed an order since 2019; (3) that XL’s technology had been materially overstated and offered only 5% to 10% of fleet savings; (4) that XL lacks the supply chain and engineers to roll out new products on the announced timelines; and (5) that, 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.

For additional information on the XL lawsuit please visit this website.

About Kirby McInerney LLP:

Kirby McInerney is a New York-based plaintiffs’ law firm concentrating in securities, antitrust, and whistleblower litigation. The firm’s efforts on behalf of shareholders in securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at Kirby McInerney’s website: www.kmllp.com.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.

Contacts
Kirby McInerney LLP
Thomas W. Elrod, Esq., (212) 371-6600
investigations@kmllp.com
www.kmllp.com