PDF

Celsius Holdings, Inc. Class Action Lawsuit - CELH

Company Name
Celsius Holdings, Inc.
Stock Symbol
CELH
Class Period
August 12, 2021 to March 1, 2022
Court
Southern District of Florida

Case Summary

The Celsius class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers of Celsius Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: CELH) securities between August 12, 2021 and March 1, 2022, inclusive (the “Class Period”) and charges Celsius and certain of its top executive officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The Celsius class action lawsuit was commenced on March 16, 2022 in the Southern District of Florida and is captioned McCallion v. Celsius Holdings, Inc., No. 22-cv-80418.

If you suffered significant losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Celsius class action lawsuit, please provide your information by clicking here.  You can also contact attorney J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com.  Lead plaintiff motions for the Celsius class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than May 16, 2022.

CASE ALLEGATIONS: Celsius develops, markets, and sells functional drinks and liquid supplements.  Celsius’ core offerings include pre- and post-workout functional energy drinks and protein bars.

The Celsius class action lawsuit alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose that: (i) Celsius had improperly recorded expenses for non-cash share-based compensation for the second and third quarters of 2021; (ii) as a result, Celsius’ financial statements for those periods would be restated, including to report a net loss for the third quarter of 2021; (iii) there was a material weakness in Celsius’ internal controls over financial reporting; and (iv) consequently, defendants’ positive statements about Celsius’ business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On March 1, 2022, Celsius disclosed that it could not timely file its 2021 annual report due to “staffing limitations, unanticipated delays and identified material errors in previous filings.”  Specifically, Celsius “determined that the calculation and expense of non-cash share-based compensation, related to grants of stock options and restricted stock units awarded to certain former employees and retired directors were materially understated for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2021 and three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2021.”  As a result, management concluded that there was a material weakness in Celsius’ internal controls over financial reporting.  On this news, Celsius’ stock price fell more than 8%, damaging investors.

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased Celsius securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Celsius class action lawsuit.  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 class action lawsuit.  The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the class action lawsuit.  An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery of the class action lawsuit is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

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’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.

Main Menu