| COMPANY |
Driven Brands Holdings Inc. |
| COURT |
United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| CASE NUMBER |
23-cv-00895 |
| JUDGE |
The Hon. Max Oliver Cogburn Jr. |
| CLASS PERIOD |
October 27, 2021 through August 1, 2023 |
| SECURITY TYPE |
Common Stock |
Driven 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 February 20, 2024 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 Driven Brands Holdings Inc. (“Driven”) (NASDAQ: DRVN) common stock between October 27, 2021 and August 1, 2023, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”).
Case Background:
On August 2, 2023, Driven reported its earnings for the second quarter of 2023, revealing the company missed expectations attributed to delays in the integration of its acquired auto glass businesses and to increased exposure to “intensified competitive intrusion” in its Car Wash segment, which negatively impacted consumer demand and the company’s margins. Driven also slashed its financial guidance for fiscal 2023 for the same reasons—announcing that it was reducing its projected revenue by $50 million, adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization by $55 million, and adjusted earnings per share by $0.29 per share for fiscal year 2023. On this news, the price of Driven common stock declined $10.63 per share, or more than 41%, from a close of $25.83 per share on August 1, 2023, to close at $15.20 per share on August 2, 2023.
The complaint 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 misrepresented and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Driven was “several quarters” behind on integrating auto glass businesses it had acquired; (2) the company’s Car Wash business was faltering and more exposed to a decline in demand from retail customers than it represented to investors; and (3) as a result, Defendants’ statements about the company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
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.