EQS-News: ROSEN, A LEADING INVESTOR RIGHTS LAW FIRM, Encourages Mobileye Global Inc. Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action - MBLY

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources or any meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about Mobileye's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) to avoid the shortages experienced amid supply chain constraints in 2021 and 2022, Mobileye’s Tier 1 customers had purchased inventory in excess of demand during fiscal 2023; (2) as a result, Mobileye’s customers had excess inventory on hand, including approximately 6-7 million units of EyeQ System-on-Chip, a computer chip used for driver-assistance and partial autonomous driving; (3) due to the build-up of inventory, there was a significant risk that the Tier 1 customers would buy less product, thus adversely impacting Mobileye’s fiscal 2024 financial results; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, defendant’s positive statements about Mobileye’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.