| COMPANY |
Enovix Corporation |
| COURT |
United States District Court for the Northern District of California |
| CASE NUMBER |
23-cv-00071 |
| JUDGE |
The Hon. Susan Illston |
| CLASS PERIOD |
February 22, 2021 and January 3, 2023 |
| SECURITY TYPE |
Common Stock |
Enovix Corporation investors may receive additional information about the case by clicking the link "Submit Your Information" above. If you are a member of the class described below, you may no later than March 7, 2023 move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class, if you so choose.
A class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of those who purchased or acquired Enovix Corporation (“Enovix”) (NASDAQ: ENVX) common stock (f/k/a Rodgers Silicon Valley Acquisition Corp. prior to July 15, 2021) between February 22, 2021 through January 3, 2023, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”).
Case Background:
In November 2021, Enovix announced that it had begun developing a second automated production line at its Fab-1 facility. The second line, Enovix told investors, would be a “workhorse” focusing on batteries for mobile electronics, such as laptops and smartphones, thereby supporting Enovix’s “ramp” to achieve meaningful scale and revenue in the consumer electronics market starting in 2023.
However, on November 1, 2022, Enovix announced it realized just $8,000 in revenue for the third quarter of fiscal year 2022. Enovix also revealed that it would be "dialing back" its work on improving existing manufacturing lines to focus on its future manufacturing lines. Additionally, Enovix revealed it anticipated producing fewer than one million batteries in 2023. Following this news, Enovix's stock price declined approximately 44%.
Then, on January 3, 2023, Enovix's Executive Chairman revealed that Enovix's second production facility and future manufacturing lines would be delayed by several additional months because of equipment failures. Following this news, Enovix's stock price declined an additional 41%.
The complaint against Enovix alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about Enovix’s business and operations. Specifically, the Defendants overstated Enovix’s ability to produce batteries at scale, touting the company’s “meaningful progress” in scaling up its manufacturing ability despite its continued technical issues. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the significant decline in the market value of Enovix’s common stock, Enovix’s investors have suffered significant losses and damages.
A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Filling out the online form above or communicating with any counsel is not necessary to participate or share in any recovery achieved in this case. Any member of the purported class may move the court to serve as a lead plaintiff through counsel of his/her choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an inactive class member.
If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP: Jonathan Naji, Esq. (484) 270-1453 or via e-mail at info@ktmc.com. If you would like additional information about the suit, please click on the link "Submit Your Information" above and fill out the form as promptly as possible.