Garret Motion Inc.

Period: 10/01/2018 to 09/18/2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: 11/24/2020

SUMMARY OF CASE:

A securities class action has been filed against Garret Motion Inc. ((NYSE: GTX, OTC: GTXMQ) on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Garret Motion securities between October 1, 2018 through September 18, 2020. This case has been filed in the USDC – S.D.N.Y.

Garrett designs, manufactures and sells turbocharger, electric-boosting and connected vehicle technologies for original equipment manufacturers and the aftermarket. In October 2018, the Company formed as a spin-off of the Transportation Systems business of Honeywell International Inc. (“Honeywell”).

On August 26, 2020, before the market opened, the Company disclosed that its “leveraged capital structure poses significant challenges to its overall strategic and financial flexibility and may impair its ability to gain or hold market share in the highly competitive automotive supply market, thereby putting Garrett at a meaningful disadvantage relative to its peers.” Garrett further stated that its “high leverage is exacerbated by significant claims asserted by Honeywell against certain Garrett subsidiaries under the disputed subordinated asbestos indemnity and the tax matters agreement.” On this news, the Company’s share price fell $3.04, or 44%, to close at $3.84 per share on August 26, 2020, thereby damaging investors.

On Sunday, September 20, 2020, Garrett announced that it had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. On Monday, September 21, 2020, the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) announced that it would commence proceedings to delist Garrett’s stock from the NYSE after the Company’s disclosure that it had filed for bankruptcy. On this news, the Company’s stock began trading over-the-counter and closed at $1.76 per share on September 22, 2020, a 12% decline from the closing price on September 18, 2020.

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that, due to its agreement to indemnify and reimburse Honeywell for certain asbestos-related liability, Garrett was saddled with an unsustainable level of debt; (2) that, as a result, Garrett had a highly leveraged capital structure that posed significant challenges to its overall strategic and financial flexibility; (3) that, as a result of the foregoing, Garrett’s ability to gain or hold market share was impaired; (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company was reasonably likely to seek bankruptcy protection; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.