17 Education & Technology Group Inc. Class Action Lawsuit - YQ
Investors who suffered a loss and would like to learn more, click here to contact us.
The 17 Education & Technology class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of 17 Education & Technology Group Inc. (NASDAQ: YQ) publicly traded securities pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and related prospectus (collectively, the “Registration Statement”) issued in connection with 17 Education & Technology’s December 4, 2020 initial public offering (the “IPO”). The 17 Education & Technology class action lawsuit – captioned Zhang v. 17 Education & Technology Group Inc., No. 22-cv-04937 (C.D. Cal.) – charges 17 Education & Technology, and certain of its top executives, directors, and underwriters with violations of the Securities Act of 1933.
If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the 17 Education & Technology class action lawsuit, please provide your information in the form on this page. You can also contact attorney J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at email@example.com. Lead plaintiff motions for the 17 Education & Technology class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than September 19, 2022.
CASE ALLEGATIONS: 17 Education & Technology offered tutoring services related to academic subjects to students from kindergarten through the last year of senior high school (“K-12 Academic AST Services”) in the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”). On December 4, 2020, 17 Education & Technology held its IPO, issuing approximately 27,400,000 American Depositary Shares (“ADSs”) to the investing public at $10.50 per ADS, pursuant to the Registration Statement.
PRC authorities have been targeting private education companies and tutoring companies, especially including those that are Western-financed, for reform publicly since at least February 2019. In January 2021, the month after the IPO, Chinese authorities publicly made clear within the PRC, again, that they would reform the private tutoring industry in which 17 Education & Technology operated. In doing so, for example, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, the highest internal enforcement division of the Chinese Communist Party, and the National Supervision Commission of the PRC released an article warning about reforms of abuses by private education companies. In light of the proposed, discussed, and enacted reforms from and connected to the 2018-2022 plan for modernizing Chinese education, several other Chinese education technology firms, including VIPKid, Huohua Siwei, Zuoyebang, and Yuanfudao, reportedly scrapped or postponed plans for initial public offerings.
The 17 Education & Technology Group class action lawsuit alleges that the IPO’s Registration Statement was false and/or misleading and/or failed to disclose that: (i) 17 Education & Technology’s K-12 Academic AST Services would end less than a year after the IPO; and (ii) as part of its ongoing regulatory efforts, Chinese authorities would imminently curtail and/or end 17 Education & Technology’s core business.
On July 23, 2021, mere months after the IPO, Chinese authorities formally revealed to the public continued regulations which banned after-school tutoring companies that teach the school curriculum from making profits, raising capital, or going public. These measures formally ended any potential growth in the for-profit tutoring sector in the PRC.
As of July 13, 2022, the price of 17 Education & Technology ADS has fallen by approximately 85% from the $10.50 IPO price.
THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired 17 Education & Technology publicly traded securities pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement issued in connection with the IPO to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the 17 Education & Technology class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the 17 Education & Technology class action lawsuit. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the 17 Education & Technology class action lawsuit.
ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world’s leading complex class action firms representing plaintiffs in securities fraud cases. The Firm is ranked #1 on the 2021 ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report for recovering nearly $2 billion for investors last year alone – more than triple the amount recovered by any other plaintiffs’ firm. With 200 lawyers in 9 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs’ firms in the world and the Firm’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest securities class action recovery ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig.