Attention SWK Shareholders

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP Reminds Shareholders of Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. (SWK) and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm

The law firm of Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP (www.ktmc.com) informs investors that a securities class action lawsuit has been filed against Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. (“Stanley”) (NYSE: SWK). The action charges Stanley with violations of the federal securities laws, including omissions and fraudulent misrepresentations relating to the company’s business, operations, and prospects. As a result of Stanley’s materially misleading statements and omissions to the public, Stanley’s investors have suffered significant losses.

CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT YOUR STANLEY LOSSES. YOU CAN ALSO CLICK ON THE FOLLOWING LINK OR COPY AND PASTE IN YOUR BROWSER: https://www.ktmc.com/new-cases/stanley-black-decker-inc?utm_source=PR& ...

TO VIEW OUR VIDEO, PLEASE CLICK HERE

LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: MAY 23, 2023

CLASS PERIOD: OCTOBER 28, 2021 THROUGH JULY 28, 2022

CONTACT AN ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS YOUR RIGHTS:
Jonathan Naji, Esq. at [phone] or via email at [e-mail]

Kessler Topaz is one of the world’s foremost advocates in protecting the public against corporate fraud and other wrongdoing. Our securities fraud litigators are regularly recognized as leaders in the field individually and our firm is both feared and respected among the defense bar and the insurance bar. We are proud to have recovered billions of dollars for our clients and the classes of shareholders we represent.

STANLEY’S ALLEGED MISCONDUCT
On October 28, 2021, before the market opened, Stanley issued a press release reporting topline financial and operating results for the company’s third fiscal quarter of 2021. In the release, the company emphasized that “customer demand remains robust” which was driven, in part, “by our industry-leading innovation and strong professional demand.” Defendants falsely blamed a “universally difficult supply chain environment” and “inflationary trends” as the primary headwinds for Stanley’s growth.

Throughout the Class Period, Defendants repeatedly reassured investors that demand would remain high and that, should demand drop, Stanley would react accordingly. Additionally, while Defendants admitted that supply chain management and component sourcing was integral for Stanley to keep production in pace with demand in its core Tools and Outdoor business, Defendants misrepresented to investors throughout the Class Period that they were closely monitoring the effects of inflation and price increases on consumer demand, and that Defendants would react accordingly if the demand environment changed. Contrary to Defendants’ statements touting the heightened consumer demand and their ability to react accordingly to any effects of inflation or price increases on said demand, Stanley was incapable of nimbly responding to serious headwinds that indicated the pandemic demand bubble was soon to pop. Furthermore, Defendants knew that their statements were false and misleading as they admittedly tracked Stanley’s point-of-sale results to monitor demand.