Lilium NV
Investors that purchased the Company’s securities and have suffered a loss, please fill in transaction information below, or email to info@portnoylaw.com.
There is no cost or obligation associated with submitting your information. If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, please submit your contact information and purchase information to participate in the putative class action.
We also encourage you to contact Lesley F. Portnoy of The Portnoy Law Firm, at 310.692.8883, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also reach us through the firm’s website at www.portnoylaw.com, or by email at info@portnoylaw.com.
If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member.
Joining the case through the Portnoy Law website enables investors to learn about their legal claims and take an active role in recovering their losses.
The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors around the world and specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder rights litigation.
CONTACT:
Portnoy Law Firm
Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq.,
www.portnoylaw.com
Office: 310.692.8883
1800 Century Park East, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
info@portnoylaw.com
On March 14, 2022, Iceberg Research published a report, questioning Lilium’s technology for both its aircraft, the Lilium Jet, and its battery cells; its timeline for government certification for commercial flight; and a sale of more than 200 jets.
On this news, Lilium NV’s share price plummeted thereby harming investors.
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (1) Lilium materially overstates the Lilium Jet’s design and capabilities; (2) Lilium materially overstates the likelihood for the Lilium Jet’s timely certification; (3) Lilium misrepresents its ability to obtain or create the necessary batteries for the Lilium Jet; (4) the SPAC-merger would not and did not generate enough cash to commercially launch the Lilium Jet; (5) Qell Acquisition Corp. did not engage in proper due diligence regarding the Merger; and (6) as a result, defendants’ public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
