Catalent, Inc.
(NYSE: CTLT)
Rigrodsky Law, P.A. is investigating potential claims against the officers and directors of Catalent, Inc. ("Catalent" or the "Company") on behalf of stockholders. A class action complaint has been filed against Catalent. The complaint alleges that by mid-2021, when COVID-related work dropped off, defendants engaged in accounting and channel stuffing schemes to pad the Company's revenues. These schemes gave Catalent the appearance of continued growth, causing its stock price to reach record highs. Meanwhile, to support these schemes and keep pace with its lofty growth targets, Catalent was cutting corners on safety and control procedures at key production facilities. By late 2022, Catalent reported significant sales declines and excess inventory throughout its supply chain. As a result, Catalent stock dropped to pre-COVID levels causing substantial losses to its investors as they learned that Catalent's early-COVID revenues were never sustainable. The complaint further alleges that statements made by defendants were materially false and misleading when made because they misrepresented or failed to disclose the following adverse facts, which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (i) Catalent materially overstated its revenue and earnings by prematurely recognizing revenue in violation of U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); (ii) Catalent had material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting related to revenue recognition; (iii) Catalent falsely represented demand for its products while it knowingly sold more product to its direct customers than could be sold to healthcare providers and end consumers; (iv) Catalent disregarded regulatory rules at key production facilities in order to rapidly produce excess inventory that was used to pad the Company's financial results through premature revenue recognition in violation of GAAP and/or stuffing its direct customers with this excess inventory; and (v) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company's financial performance, outlook, and regulatory compliance.