SHAREHOLDER ALERT: KRBP TUYA DDL: The Law Offices of Vincent Wong Reminds Investors of Important Class Action Deadlines

NEW YORK, NY / ACCESSWIRE / September 7, 2022 / The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that class actions have commenced on behalf of certain shareholders in the following companies. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. There will be no obligation or cost to you.

Kiromic BioPharma, Inc. KRBP

If you suffered a loss, contact us at: https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/kiromic-biopharma-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=31443&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 4, 2022
This lawsuit is on behalf of a class consisting of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired: (a) Kiromic common stock issued in connection with the Company's public offering that closed on July 2, 2021 and/or (b) Kiromic common stock between June 25, 2021 and August 13, 2021, both dates inclusive.

The complaint alleges that the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's public offering that closed on July 2, 2021 (the "Offering Documents") failed to disclose that the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") had, prior to the filing of these documents, imposed a clinical hold on the Company's Investigational New Drug ("IND") applications for its two new drug candidates. Given that the offering closed on July 2, 2021, more than thirty (30) days after the Company submitted the IND applications for its two immunotherapy product candidates, investors were assured that no clinical hold had been issued and clinical trials would commence.

Tuya Inc. TUYA

If you suffered a loss, contact us at: https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/tuya-loss-submission-form?prid=31443&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 11, 2022
This lawsuit is on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased Tuya American Depositary Shares in or traceable to the Company's March 2021 initial public offering.

Allegations against TUYA include that: (a) a material portion of Tuya's China-based customers were engaged in the widespread and systematic manipulation of reviews and product offerings in violation of Amazon.com's terms of use; (b) prior to the initial public offering, a consumer investigation and data breach had exposed an illicit fake review scheme being perpetrated by many of Tuya's clients, among others, which included, inter alia, the exposure of 13 million records of organized fake review scams linked to over 200,000 Amazon account profiles; (c) as a result of (a) and (b) above, there was a substantial risk that a material portion of Tuya's significant customers would be barred from using Amazon.com's platform, negatively impacting Tuya's business, revenue, earnings, and prospects; and (d) as a result of (a)-(c) above, the registration statement's representations regarding Tuya's historical financial and operational metrics and purported market opportunities and expected growth did not accurately reflect the actual business, operations, financial results, and trajectory of the Company at the time of the initial public offering, and such statements were materially false and misleading and lacked a reasonable factual basis.

Dingdong (Cayman) Ltd. DDL

If you suffered a loss, contact us at: https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/dingdong-cayman-ltd-loss-submission-form?prid=31443&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 24, 2022
This lawsuit is on behalf of persons who purchased, or otherwise acquired, Dingdong American Depository Shares pursuant or traceable to the F-1 registration statements and related prospectus on Form 424B4 issued in connection with Dingdong's June 2021 initial public stock offering.

According to the filed complaint, the registration statement and prospectus used to effectuate the Company's initial public offering misstated and/or omitted facts concerning Dingdong's so-called commitment to ensuring the safety and quality of the food it distributes to the market. For example, despite claiming that it applies "stringent quality control across [its] entire supply chain to ensure product quality to [its] users," Dingdong sold food past its sell-by date. Consequently, Dingdong was, in fact, no better at providing or assuring access to "fresh" groceries than the supermarkets, traditional Chinese wet markets, or traditional e-commerce platforms it repeatedly claimed to be displacing. Moreover, the foregoing conduct subjected Dingdong to an increased risk of regulatory and/or governmental scrutiny and enforcement, all of which, once revealed, were likely to negatively impact Dingdong's business, operations, and reputation.

To learn more contact Vincent Wong, Esq. either via email vw@wongesq.com or by telephone at 212.425.1140.

Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Vincent Wong, Esq.
39 East Broadway
Suite 304
New York, NY 10002
Tel. 212.425.1140
Fax. 866.699.3880
E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com

SOURCE: The Law Offices of Vincent Wong