Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against FirstEnergy, MEI Pharma, Cabot Oil & Gas, and Kodak and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm

NEW YORK, Sept. 02, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of FirstEnergy Corp. (NYSE: FE), MEI Pharma, Inc. (NADAQ: MEIP), Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation (NYSE: COG), and Eastman Kodak Company (NYSE: KODK). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found at the link provided.

FirstEnergy Corporation (NYSE: FE)

Class Period: February 21, 2017 to July 21, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: September 28, 2020

On July 21, 2020, federal agents announced the arrest of Ohio Speaker Larry Householder and four other persons, including a prominent FirstEnergy lobbyist, in connection with a $60 million racketeering and bribery scheme.

On this news, the Company’s share price fell by $7.01, or 17%, to close at $34.25 per share on July 21, 2020.

On July 22, 2020, Cleveland.com published an article entitled “FirstEnergy was relentless in quest to have Ohio legislature bail out the utility’s nuclear plants,” which provided further details regarding FirstEnergy’s illicit activities.

On this news, the Company’s share price fell by $7.16, or 21%, to close at $27.09 per share on July 22, 2020.

The complaint, filed on July 28, 2020, 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 FirstEnergy and its representatives and affiliates had orchestrated a $60 million campaign to corrupt the political process in order to secure the passage of legislation favoring the Company and its affiliates; (2) that FirstEnergy and its representatives and affiliates had secretly funneled tens of millions of dollars to Ohio politicians to bribe those politicians in order to secure votes in favor of Ohio House Bill 6 (“HB6”), a $1.3 billion ratepayer bailout for FirstEnergy’s unprofitable nuclear facilities; (3) that FirstEnergy and its representatives and affiliates had conducted a massive, misleading advertising campaign in support of HB6 and in opposition to a ballot initiative to repeal HB6 by passing millions of dollars through an intricate web of “dark money” entities and front companies in order to conceal the Company’s involvement; (4) that FirstEnergy and its representatives and affiliates had subverted a citizens’ ballot initiative to repeal HB6 by, among other unscrupulous tactics, hiring more than 15 signature gathering firms (and thus conflicting them out of supporting the initiative) and bribing ballot initiative insiders and signature collectors; (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ Class Period statements regarding FirstEnergy’s regulatory and legislative efforts were materially false and misleading; and (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, FirstEnergy was subject to an extreme, undisclosed risk of reputational, legal and financial harm.

For more information on the FirstEnergy class action go to: https://bespc.com/FE

MEI Pharma, Inc. (NASDAQ: MEIP)

Class Period: August 2, 2017 and July 1, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 9, 2020

MEI Pharma is a late-stage pharmaceutical company that focuses on the development of various therapies for the treatment of cancer. MEI Pharma’s clinical drug candidates include, among others, Pracinostat, an oral histone deacetylase (“HDAC”) inhibitor.

MEI Pharma and Helsinn Healthcare SA, a Swiss pharmaceutical corporation (“Helsinn”), with which MEI Pharma had an exclusive worldwide license, development, manufacturing and commercialization agreement for Pracinostat in acute myeloid leukemia (“AML”), myelodysplastic syndrome, and other potential indications (the “Helsinn License Agreement”), were evaluating Pracinostat in, among other studies, a pivotal Phase 3 global registration clinical trial for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed AML who are unfit to receive intensive chemotherapy (the “Phase 3 Pracinostat Trial”). The Phase 3 Pracinostat Trial, which was initiated in June 2017, was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study that would enroll worldwide approximately 500 adults with newly diagnosed AML who are unfit to receive intensive chemotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Pracinostat or placebo with azacitidine as background therapy. The primary endpoint of the trial was overall survival.

On July 2, 2020, MEI Pharma issued a press release announcing that it was discontinuing the Phase 3 Pracinostat Trial. Specifically, the Company advised that an interim futility analysis of the Phase 3 Pracinostat Trial, undertaken by the study’s Independent Data Monitoring Committee (“IDMC”), “has demonstrated it was unlikely to meet the primary endpoint of overall survival compared to the control group,” and that “[b]ased on the outcome of the interim analysis, the decision was made to discontinue the recruitment of patients and end the study,” which “was based on a lack of efficacy and not on safety concerns.”

Following the announcement, the Company’s stock price fell $0.78 per share, or 18.27%, to close at $3.49 per share on July 2, 2020.

The complaint, filed on August 10, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) MEI Pharma had overstated Pracinostat’s potential efficacy as an AML treatment for the target population; (ii) consequently, the Phase 3 Pracinostat Trial was unlikely to meet its primary endpoint of overall survival; (iii) all the foregoing, once revealed, was foreseeably likely to have a material negative impact on the Company’s financial condition and prospects for Pracinostat; and (iv) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

For more information on the MEI Pharma class action go to: https://bespc.com/MEIP

Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation (NYSE: COG)

Class Period: October 23, 2015 to June 12, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 13, 2020

Cabot was incorporated in 1989 and is headquartered in Houston, Texas. Cabot is an independent oil and gas company that explores for, exploits, develops, produces, and markets oil and gas properties in the U.S.

Cabot primarily focuses its oil and gas efforts on the Marcellus Shale located in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. Cabot’s gas procuring activities in Pennsylvania have been the subject of controversy for over a decade, with the Company repeatedly denying any responsibility for environmental damage observed in the state.

On July 26, 2019, Cabot filed a quarterly report on Form 10-Q with the SEC, reporting the Company’s financial and operating results for the quarter ended June 30, 2019 (the “2Q19 10-Q”). The 2Q19 10-Q disclosed that the Company had received two proposed Consent Order and Agreements (“CO&As”) related to two Notices of Violation (“NOVs”) it had received from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (“PaDEP”) back in June and November, 2017, respectively, for failure to prevent the migration of gas into fresh groundwater sources in the area surrounding Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania.

Following the release of the 2Q19 10-Q, Cabot’s stock price fell $2.63 per share, or 12.07%, to close at $19.16 per share on July 26, 2019.

Then, on June 15, 2020, during pre-market hours, following a grand jury investigation, the Pennsylvania attorney general’s office charged Cabot with fifteen criminal counts arising from its failure to fix faulty gas wells, thereby polluting Pennsylvania’s water supplies through stray gas migration.

On this news, Cabot’s stock price fell $0.67 per share, or 3.34%, to close at $19.40 per share on June 15, 2020.

The complaint, filed on August 13, 2020, alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Cabot had inadequate environmental controls and procedures and/or failed to properly mitigate known issues related to those controls and procedures; (ii) as a result, Cabot, among other issues, failed to fix faulty gas wells, thereby polluting Pennsylvania’s water supplies through stray gas migration; (iii) the foregoing was foreseeably likely to subject Cabot to increased governmental scrutiny and enforcement, as well as increased reputational and financial harm; (iv) Cabot continually downplayed its potential civil and/or criminal liabilities with respect to such environmental matters; and (v) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

For more information on the Cabot Oil & Gas class action go to: https://bespc.com/COG

Eastman Kodak Company (NYSE: KODK)

Class Period: July 27, 2020 to August 11, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 13, 2020

The securities class action concerns several matters, including the suspicious timing of insider trading activity in connection with Kodak’s July 28, 2020 announcement that it had reached an agreement with the U.S. government to receive a $765 million loan to produce pharmaceutical ingredients.

As news of the deal broke, Kodak, which had been trading under $2 per share, skyrocketed, and within two days, the stock was trading around $60 per share, with 284 million shares changing hands. Just prior to the announcement of the loan, insiders purchased or were granted over 2 million shares of Kodak stock.

More specifically, the day before the deal was announced, the company granted CEO James Continenza options for 1.75 million shares, just under 29% of which vested immediately. As a result of the suspicious timing of the announcement, lawmakers have asked federal regulators to investigate securities transactions made by the company and its executives around the time Kodak learned it could receive the government loan, and the SEC has announced an investigation. On August 7, 2020, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation said it was holding up the payout of the loan as regulators look into insider trading activity.

On this news, the Company’s stock price declined $4.15, or 28%, from $14.88 per share on August 7, 2020, to $10.73 per share on August 10, 2020.

The complaint, filed on August 13, 2020, alleges that during the Class Period defendants engaged in a scheme to deceive the market and a course of conduct that artificially inflated the prices of Kodak’s securities and operated as a fraud or deceit on Class Period purchasers of Kodak’s securities by failing to disclose to investors that the company’s financial results were materially misleading and misrepresented material information. When defendants’ misrepresentations and fraudulent conduct were disclosed and became apparent to the market, the prices of Kodak’s securities fell precipitously as the prior inflation came out of the Company’s stock price.

For more information on the Kodak class action go to: https://bespc.com/KODK

About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York and California. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com