Core Viewpoint - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP is investigating potential claims against KBR, Inc. related to alleged violations of federal securities laws, with a deadline for investors to seek lead plaintiff status by November 18, 2025 [1][2]. Group 1: Allegations Against KBR - The complaint alleges that KBR and its executives made false and misleading statements regarding the HomeSafe's ability to fulfill the Global Household Goods Contract, despite knowing about the U.S. Department of Defense's concerns [2]. - The lawsuit claims that KBR's statements about its business operations and prospects were materially false and misleading, leading to investor damages when the truth was revealed [2]. Group 2: Stock Price Impact - Following the announcement of the termination of the Global Household Goods Contract by HomeSafe, KBR's stock price fell by $3.85 per share, or 7.29%, closing at $48.93 on June 20, 2025 [3]. - On the next trading day, KBR's stock experienced an additional decline of $1.30, or 2.65%, closing at $47.63 on June 23, 2025 [3]. Group 3: Legal Proceedings - The lead plaintiff in the class action will be the investor with the largest financial interest who is also adequate and typical of class members [4]. - Faruqi & Faruqi encourages anyone with information regarding KBR's conduct to come forward, including whistleblowers and former employees [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against KBR, Inc. alleging securities fraud that affected investors between May 6, 2025, and June 19, 2025 [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that KBR, Inc. made false statements regarding its partnership with HomeSafe, despite knowing that the U.S. Department of Defense had concerns about HomeSafe's ability to fulfill a global household goods contract [2]. - It is alleged that the defendants misled investors about KBR's business operations and future prospects, which were materially false and lacked a reasonable basis [2]. Group 2: Investor Information - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until November 18, 2025, to request to be appointed as lead plaintiff, although participation in any recovery does not require serving as a lead plaintiff [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees, and there is no obligation to participate [3]. Group 3: Legal Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a strong track record in securities litigation, having secured hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders over the past 20 years [4]. - The firm has been recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States for seven consecutive years by ISS Securities Class Action Services [4].

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Litigation Partner Brandon Walker Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In KBR To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options If you purchased or acquired KBR securities between May 6, 2025 and June 19, 2025 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Bragar Eagel & Squire partner Brandon Walker or Marion Passmore directly at (212) 355-4648. Click here to participate in the action. NEW YORK, Oct. 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- What’s Happening: Bragar Eagel & Squire, P. ...

Core Viewpoint - The Law Offices of Howard G. Smith has announced a securities fraud class action lawsuit against KBR, Inc. for failing to disclose material concerns regarding its partnership with TRANSCOM and the implications for its business operations [1][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit alleges that from May 6, 2025, to June 19, 2025, KBR, Inc. misled investors by claiming that there were no issues with its partnership with TRANSCOM, despite being aware of significant concerns regarding HomeSafe's ability to fulfill the Global Household Goods Contract [3]. - The complaint states that KBR's positive statements about its business and prospects were materially misleading and lacked a reasonable basis during the relevant period [3]. Group 2: Participation Information - Investors who suffered losses in KBR, Inc. are encouraged to contact the Law Offices of Howard G. Smith before November 18, 2025, to participate in the ongoing class action lawsuit [2][4]. - Individuals interested in learning more about the class action or their rights can reach out to the Law Offices of Howard G. Smith via email or phone [4][5].

NO COST TO YOU: If you are a class member, you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out-of-pocket costs or fees. There is no cost or obligation to participate. WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY: Over the past 20 years, the team at Levi & Korsinsky has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders and built a track record of winning high-stakes cases. Our firm has extensive expertise representing investors in complex securities litigation and a team of over 70 employees to serve our ...

Core Viewpoint - Investors in KBR, Inc. have the opportunity to lead a securities fraud class action lawsuit due to alleged misleading statements made by the company regarding its partnership with TRANSCOM and the Global Household Goods Contract [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit alleges that from May 6, 2025, to June 19, 2025, KBR failed to disclose material concerns regarding HomeSafe's ability to fulfill its contractual obligations, despite being aware of these issues for months [2]. - Defendants are accused of making positive statements about KBR's business and operations that were materially misleading and lacked a reasonable basis during the relevant time period [2]. Group 2: Participation Information - Investors who suffered losses related to KBR are encouraged to participate in the ongoing lawsuit, with a lead plaintiff deadline set for November 18, 2025 [2]. - Interested parties can contact The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz for more information or to learn about their rights regarding the lawsuit [3][4].

Core Viewpoint - A class-action lawsuit has been filed against KBR, Inc. for allegedly misleading investors prior to the cancellation of a significant military contract, resulting in a substantial drop in the company's stock price [1][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit, Norrman v. KBR, Inc., claims that KBR executives provided a falsely optimistic outlook on a crucial partnership just before it collapsed [2]. - The class period for the lawsuit is defined as May 6, 2025, to June 19, 2025, with a lead plaintiff deadline set for November 18, 2025 [2]. - The legal action seeks to represent shareholders who purchased KBR securities during the specified class period [2]. Group 2: Contract Cancellation Impact - The litigation arises from the U.S. Department of Defense's cancellation of a global household goods contract with HomeSafe Alliance LLC, a joint venture led by KBR, which was valued at up to $20 billion over a potential nine-year term [3]. - Following the announcement of the contract termination on June 20, 2025, KBR's shares fell over 7% as investors reacted to the loss [3]. Group 3: Misrepresentation Allegations - On May 6, 2025, during its Q1 earnings call, KBR assured investors that the HomeSafe partnership was "strong" and "excellent," expressing confidence in the program's future [4]. - Just weeks later, on June 19, 2025, HomeSafe disclosed that TRANSCOM had terminated the contract due to operational issues, including delays and complaints about damaged goods [4]. - The lawsuit alleges that KBR was aware of TRANSCOM's concerns but chose to conceal them from investors, leading to significant financial losses for shareholders [4]. Group 4: Investigation and Whistleblower Information - Hagens Berman, the law firm leading the investigation, is focused on whether KBR intentionally misled investors regarding the status of its relationship with TRANSCOM and the contract [5]. - Whistleblowers with non-public information about KBR are encouraged to assist in the investigation, with potential rewards under the SEC Whistleblower program [6].

Core Viewpoint - The Gross Law Firm has issued a notice to shareholders of KBR, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit alleging that the company made materially false and misleading statements about its business operations and prospects during a specific class period [1]. Group 1: Allegations and Class Period - The class period for the allegations is from May 6, 2025, to June 19, 2025 [1]. - The complaint claims that KBR's management misrepresented the status of its partnership with the U.S. Department of Defense's Transportation Command, despite knowing about significant concerns regarding HomeSafe's ability to fulfill a global household goods contract [1]. - As a result of these misrepresentations, statements made by KBR regarding its business and operational prospects were deemed materially false and misleading [1]. Group 2: Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders who purchased KBR shares during the specified class period are encouraged to register for the class action by November 18, 2025 [2]. - Upon registration, shareholders will be enrolled in a portfolio monitoring system to receive updates on the case's progress [2]. - There is no cost or obligation for shareholders to participate in the case [2]. Group 3: Law Firm's Mission - The Gross Law Firm is a nationally recognized class action law firm focused on protecting investors' rights against deceit, fraud, and illegal business practices [3]. - The firm aims to ensure that companies adhere to responsible business practices and seeks recovery for investors who have suffered losses due to misleading statements or omissions [3].

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP reminds investors of the upcoming November 18, 2025 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired KBR, Inc. ("KBR†or the "Company†) (NYSE: KBR) securities between May 6, 2025 and June 19, 2025, inclusive (the "Class Period†). IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR KBR INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER. ...

Core Viewpoint - Class action lawsuits have been filed against several publicly-traded companies, alleging that these companies made materially false and misleading statements regarding their business operations and prospects, which led to investor losses [1]. Group 1: Cytokinetics, Incorporated (NASDAQ: CYTK) - The class period for Cytokinetics is from December 27, 2023, to May 6, 2025, with a lead plaintiff deadline of November 17, 2025 [2]. - Allegations include the failure to disclose the omission of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) from the initial New Drug Application (NDA), which resulted in a three-month delay in FDA approval processes [2]. - Defendants' positive statements about the company's business were deemed materially misleading due to these omissions [2]. Group 2: Quanex Building Products Corporation (NYSE: NX) - The class period for Quanex is from December 12, 2024, to September 5, 2025, with a lead plaintiff deadline of November 18, 2025 [4]. - The complaint alleges that the company underinvested in tooling and equipment maintenance, leading to degraded conditions that could incur significant costs and delay expected benefits from integration efforts [4]. - Positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's operations were found to lack a reasonable basis due to these undisclosed issues [4]. Group 3: Jasper Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: JSPR) - The class period for Jasper is from November 30, 2023, to July 3, 2025, with a lead plaintiff deadline of November 18, 2025 [6]. - Allegations include the lack of necessary controls to ensure third-party manufacturers complied with current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP), which could negatively impact clinical trial results and the company's product prospects [6]. - Defendants' positive statements about the company's business and financial prospects were considered materially misleading due to these failures [6]. Group 4: KBR, Inc. (NYSE: KBR) - The class period for KBR is from May 6, 2025, to June 19, 2025, with a lead plaintiff deadline of November 18, 2025 [8]. - The complaint alleges that the company misled investors about the partnership with TRANSCOM, despite knowing of material concerns regarding HomeSafe's ability to fulfill contract obligations [8]. - Positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's operations were found to lack a reasonable basis due to these undisclosed concerns [8].