COMPANY |
Iris Energy Limited |
COURT |
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
CASE NUMBER |
24-cv-07046 |
JUDGE |
The Hon. Peggy Kuo |
CLASS PERIOD |
June 20, 2023 through July 11, 2024 |
SECURITY TYPE |
Securities |
LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE IS DECEMBER 6, 2024.
If you have suffered losses and would like to discuss your rights, please fill out this form or you may contact Jonathan Naji, Esq. at (484) 270-1453 or via e-mail at info@ktmc.com.
Case Background:
On July 11, 2024, Culper Research published a short-seller report (the “Culper Report”) alleging that “the company has dramatically misrepresented the strength and potential of its assets for HPC/AI applications.” The Culper Report noted that Iris Energy’s Childress facilities lacked numerous features that are critical to HPC applications, stating that the company was a “non-player in the HPC space because its facilities were built for [Bitcoin] mining and are ill-equipped for HPC workloads without billions in additional costs.” The Culper Report further alleged the company has spent less than $1 million per Megawatt (“MW”) to build out its existing footprint, when leading operators, analysts, and experts confirm the true cost to develop an HPC-ready data center is about $10 million to $20 million per MW. The Culper Report also alleged deficiencies in Iris Energy’s Childress data center, noting that: (1) the site had zero apparent backup or uninterruptible power supplies; (2) the company’s air cooling system is “insufficient for HPC applications, especially in the extreme temperatures of West Texas,” and is at odds with other HPC-ready data centers that use liquid cooling; (3) the company would need to form a new power purchase agreement at higher costs to ensure adequate power for its HPC operations; and (4) the Childress data center lacks a fiber and infrastructure-rich locale to support a well-equipped, long-term HPC data center. Finally, the Culper Report alleged that Iris Energy’s founders, Defendants Daniel and William Roberts, had engaged in significant sales of their shares in the company. On this news, the price of Iris Energy common stock declined $1.70 per share, or approximately 13%, from a close of $12.90 per share on July 10, 2024, to close at $11.20 per share on July 11, 2024.
The complaint alleges that, during 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) Defendants overstated Iris Energy’s prospects with HPC data centers largely due to material deficiencies in Iris Energy’s Childress County, Texas data center site that made the Childress location unsuitable for HPC data centers, rather than cryptocurrency mining; and (2) 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.
What is a Lead Plaintiff?
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.