BE Shareholder Alert: Bloom Energy Corporation Securities Class Action Lawsuit - Investors With Losses May Contact Levi & Korsinsky

A securities class action alleges Wall Street's models for Bloom Energy Corporation were built on management's repeated "no China supply chain" assurances, until a July 8, 2026 investigative report traced Chinese scandium into the Company's supply base and BE shares fell $15.28.

NEW YORK, Sept. 9, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in Bloom Energy Corporation (NYSE: BE) that a securities class action has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased securities between February 27, 2025 and July 8, 2026. Learn more about the case. You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.

BE closed at $254.29 on July 8, 2026, down $15.28 per share, or 5.7%, on unusually heavy trading volume after Hunterbrook Media published a report titled "Bloom's Big Lie." The lead plaintiff deadline in this matter is September 28, 2026.

Coverage Built on Supply Chain Assurances

Analysts covering the fuel cell sector spent the Class Period modeling tariff and rare earth exposure for a company that told the market it had none. On an April 30, 2025 earnings call, management reaffirmed 29% margin guidance for the year and told analysts the tariff impact could be mitigated to roughly 100 basis points, citing a supply base that was not dependent on China. Coverage indicated that this sourcing profile was treated as a structural advantage relative to peers exposed to Beijing's export controls.

Analyst Coverage Timeline

• February 27, 2025: Fiscal 2024 results and a Form 10-K stating the supply chain "does not have significant exposure to China" anchor sector models.
• April 30, 2025: Management reaffirms 29% margin guidance and frames tariff exposure at approximately 100 basis points.
• July 31, 2025: The Company narrows expected fiscal 2025 gross margin impact from tariffs to approximately one percent.
• October 28, 2025: A Form 10-Q acknowledges China supplies 70% of rare earth metals used at tier 2 and tier 3 sub-assembly suppliers, while maintaining the supply chain is not dependent on China.
• July 8, 2026: The Hunterbrook report traces four alleged China-linked routes, including scandium oxide shipped directly to a Delaware plant and materials routed through Thailand, Japan, and South Korea, prompting reassessment of the sourcing narrative.

Why Analyst Shifts Matter for Investors

The lawsuit contends that the assurances feeding sell-side models were materially false because Bloom Energy allegedly obtained scandium through intermediaries sourcing from China, understating its reliance on Chinese material. Analysts noted the Company's positioning as insulated from rare earth export controls, a premise the complaint alleges lacked a reasonable basis.

"When analyst expectations are built on incomplete or misleading company disclosures, the resulting corrections can cause significant investor harm. Here, the complaint alleges Bloom Energy's stated independence from Chinese scandium sourcing was central to how the market assessed its tariff and rare earth risk." -- Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Submit your information or call (212) 363-7500.

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP — Top 50 securities litigation firm (ISS, seven consecutive years). Over 70 professionals. Hundreds of millions recovered.

Frequently Asked Questions About the BE Lawsuit

Q: What specific misstatements does the BE lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges Bloom Energy made materially false or misleading statements regarding its independence from Chinese scandium and Chinese supply chain exposure during the Class Period. When a July 8, 2026 report traced Chinese scandium into the Company's supply base through intermediaries in Thailand, Japan, and South Korea, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: How much did BE stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 5.7%, a decline of $15.28 per share, to close at $254.29 on July 8, 2026 following publication of the report. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period at allegedly inflated prices and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.

Q: Who are the defendants named in the BE lawsuit? A: The complaint names Bloom Energy Corporation and individual defendants including senior executives who signed SEC filings, made public statements, or certified financial disclosures under Sarbanes-Oxley.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Being appointed does not increase individual recovery but gives direct oversight of how the case is run.

Q: What do BE investors need to do right now? A: Gather brokerage records including purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Contact Levi & Korsinsky for a free, no-obligation evaluation at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500. No immediate action is required to remain eligible as an absent class member.

Q: What if I already sold my BE shares -- can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to contact the firm. Securities class actions are generally handled on a pure contingency basis, with no retainer and no out-of-pocket costs. Any attorneys' fees and expenses awarded to class counsel are subject to court approval.

Q: How long will the lawsuit take to resolve? A: Securities class actions typically take two to four years from initial filing to resolution. Timing depends on the court schedule, case developments, and whether the matter is dismissed, settled, or litigated further.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10004
[email protected]
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

SOURCE Levi & Korsinsky, LLP