SAN DIEGO–(BUSINESS WIRE)–$ORCL #ORCL–The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces purchasers or acquirers of Oracle Corporation (NYSE: ORCL) commonSAN DIEGO–(BUSINESS WIRE)–$ORCL #ORCL–The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces purchasers or acquirers of Oracle Corporation (NYSE: ORCL) common

INVESTOR ALERT: Oracle Corporation (ORCL) Investors with Substantial Losses Have Opportunity to Lead Class Action Lawsuit, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces

2026/02/07 01:16
5 min read

SAN DIEGO–(BUSINESS WIRE)–$ORCL #ORCL–The law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces purchasers or acquirers of Oracle Corporation (NYSE: ORCL) common stock between June 12, 2025 and December 16, 2025, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), to seek appointment as lead plaintiff of the Oracle class action lawsuit. Captioned Barrows v. Oracle Corporation, No. 26-cv-00127 (D. Del.), the Oracle class action lawsuit charges Oracle and certain of Oracle’s top executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Oracle class action lawsuit, please provide your information here:

https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-oracle-corporation-class-action-lawsuit-orcl.html

You can also contact attorney J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at info@rgrdlaw.com.

CASE ALLEGATIONS: Oracle offers products and services that address enterprise information technology environments.

The Oracle class action lawsuit alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Oracle’s AI infrastructure strategy would result in massive increases in capital expenditures (“CapEx”) without equivalent, near-term growth in revenue; and (ii) Oracle’s substantially increased spending created serious risks involving Oracle’s debt and credit rating, free cash flow, and ability to fund its projects, among other concerns.

The Oracle investor class action lawsuit further alleges that on September 24, 2025, S&P Global Ratings warned that OpenAI “could account for more than a third of total Oracle revenues by fiscal 2028 and even a greater share by fiscal 2030,” creating risks given that “OpenAI’s ability to meet contractual obligations will be contingent on AI tailwinds continuing and its models being a market leader to continue to raise external financing.” On this news, the price of Oracle common stock fell, according to the complaint.

Then, on September 25, 2025, the complaint alleges that analysts at Rothschild & Co. Redburn initiated coverage of Oracle at “Sell,” warning that Oracle’s promises of massive new revenues from its increased AI infrastructure business were “unlikely to materialize” and set a $175 price target for Oracle—representing a 40% pullback in Oracle’s stock. On this news, the price of Oracle common stock fell more than 5%, according to the complaint.

Thereafter, on December 10, 2025, Oracle allegedly announced its financial results for the second quarter of fiscal year 2026, including revenue growth below analysts’ consensus estimate, quarterly CapEx well above analysts’ estimates, and negative free cash flow of more than $10 billion. On this news, the price of Oracle common stock fell nearly 11%, according to the complaint.

Subsequently, the Oracle shareholder class action lawsuit alleges that on December 12, 2025, Bloomberg reported that Oracle had “pushed back the completion dates for some of the data centers it’s developing for the artificial intelligence model developer OpenAI to 2028 from 2027” due to “labor and material shortages”—suggesting that Oracle’s promised revenue growth resulting from its increased spending may be further delayed, if it arrives at all. On this news, the price of Oracle common stock fell further, according to the complaint.

Finally, on December 17, 2025, Financial Times allegedly reported that Blue Owl Capital—“the primary [financial] backer for Oracle’s largest data centre projects in the US”—had backed out of funding a $10 billion Oracle data center intended to serve OpenAI, as a result of concerns about Oracle’s spending commitments and rising debt levels. The Oracle class action lawsuit alleges that on this news, the price of Oracle common stock fell more than 5%.

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Oracle common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Oracle class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the Oracle investor class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Oracle shareholder class action lawsuit. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff of the Oracle class action lawsuit.

ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world’s leading complex class action firms representing plaintiffs in securities fraud and shareholder rights litigation. Our Firm ranked #1 on the most recent ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report, recovering more than $916 million for investors in 2025. This marks our fourth #1 ranking in the past five years. And in those five years alone, Robbins Geller recovered $8.4 billion for investors – $3.4 billion more than any other law firm. With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs’ firms in the world, and the Firm’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Please visit the following page for more information:

https://www.rgrdlaw.com/services-litigation-securities-fraud.html

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Services may be performed by attorneys in any of our offices.

Contacts

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
J.C. Sanchez
655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101
800-449-4900
info@rgrdlaw.com

Market Opportunity
Common Protocol Logo
Common Protocol Price(COMMON)
$0.0005673
$0.0005673$0.0005673
-1.35%
USD
Common Protocol (COMMON) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Tags:

You May Also Like

FCA komt in 2026 met aangepaste cryptoregels voor Britse markt

FCA komt in 2026 met aangepaste cryptoregels voor Britse markt

De Britse financiële waakhond, de FCA, komt in 2026 met nieuwe regels speciaal voor crypto bedrijven. Wat direct opvalt: de toezichthouder laat enkele klassieke financiële verplichtingen los om beter aan te sluiten op de snelle en grillige wereld van digitale activa. Tegelijkertijd wordt er extra nadruk gelegd op digitale beveiliging,... Het bericht FCA komt in 2026 met aangepaste cryptoregels voor Britse markt verscheen het eerst op Blockchain Stories.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 00:33
United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

The post United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Information on these pages contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Markets and instruments profiled on this page are for informational purposes only and should not in any way come across as a recommendation to buy or sell in these assets. You should do your own thorough research before making any investment decisions. FXStreet does not in any way guarantee that this information is free from mistakes, errors, or material misstatements. It also does not guarantee that this information is of a timely nature. Investing in Open Markets involves a great deal of risk, including the loss of all or a portion of your investment, as well as emotional distress. All risks, losses and costs associated with investing, including total loss of principal, are your responsibility. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of FXStreet nor its advertisers. The author will not be held responsible for information that is found at the end of links posted on this page. If not otherwise explicitly mentioned in the body of the article, at the time of writing, the author has no position in any stock mentioned in this article and no business relationship with any company mentioned. The author has not received compensation for writing this article, other than from FXStreet. FXStreet and the author do not provide personalized recommendations. The author makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of this information. FXStreet and the author will not be liable for any errors, omissions or any losses, injuries or damages arising from this information and its display or use. Errors and omissions excepted. The author and FXStreet are not registered investment advisors and nothing in this article is intended…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:20
Google's AP2 protocol has been released. Does encrypted AI still have a chance?

Google's AP2 protocol has been released. Does encrypted AI still have a chance?

Following the MCP and A2A protocols, the AI Agent market has seen another blockbuster arrival: the Agent Payments Protocol (AP2), developed by Google. This will clearly further enhance AI Agents' autonomous multi-tasking capabilities, but the unfortunate reality is that it has little to do with web3AI. Let's take a closer look: What problem does AP2 solve? Simply put, the MCP protocol is like a universal hook, enabling AI agents to connect to various external tools and data sources; A2A is a team collaboration communication protocol that allows multiple AI agents to cooperate with each other to complete complex tasks; AP2 completes the last piece of the puzzle - payment capability. In other words, MCP opens up connectivity, A2A promotes collaboration efficiency, and AP2 achieves value exchange. The arrival of AP2 truly injects "soul" into the autonomous collaboration and task execution of Multi-Agents. Imagine AI Agents connecting Qunar, Meituan, and Didi to complete the booking of flights, hotels, and car rentals, but then getting stuck at the point of "self-payment." What's the point of all that multitasking? So, remember this: AP2 is an extension of MCP+A2A, solving the last mile problem of AI Agent automated execution. What are the technical highlights of AP2? The core innovation of AP2 is the Mandates mechanism, which is divided into real-time authorization mode and delegated authorization mode. Real-time authorization is easy to understand. The AI Agent finds the product and shows it to you. The operation can only be performed after the user signs. Delegated authorization requires the user to set rules in advance, such as only buying the iPhone 17 when the price drops to 5,000. The AI Agent monitors the trigger conditions and executes automatically. The implementation logic is cryptographically signed using Verifiable Credentials (VCs). Users can set complex commission conditions, including price ranges, time limits, and payment method priorities, forming a tamper-proof digital contract. Once signed, the AI Agent executes according to the conditions, with VCs ensuring auditability and security at every step. Of particular note is the "A2A x402" extension, a technical component developed by Google specifically for crypto payments, developed in collaboration with Coinbase and the Ethereum Foundation. This extension enables AI Agents to seamlessly process stablecoins, ETH, and other blockchain assets, supporting native payment scenarios within the Web3 ecosystem. What kind of imagination space can AP2 bring? After analyzing the technical principles, do you think that's it? Yes, in fact, the AP2 is boring when it is disassembled alone. Its real charm lies in connecting and opening up the "MCP+A2A+AP2" technology stack, completely opening up the complete link of AI Agent's autonomous analysis+execution+payment. From now on, AI Agents can open up many application scenarios. For example, AI Agents for stock investment and financial management can help us monitor the market 24/7 and conduct independent transactions. Enterprise procurement AI Agents can automatically replenish and renew without human intervention. AP2's complementary payment capabilities will further expand the penetration of the Agent-to-Agent economy into more scenarios. Google obviously understands that after the technical framework is established, the ecological implementation must be relied upon, so it has brought in more than 60 partners to develop it, almost covering the entire payment and business ecosystem. Interestingly, it also involves major Crypto players such as Ethereum, Coinbase, MetaMask, and Sui. Combined with the current trend of currency and stock integration, the imagination space has been doubled. Is web3 AI really dead? Not entirely. Google's AP2 looks complete, but it only achieves technical compatibility with Crypto payments. It can only be regarded as an extension of the traditional authorization framework and belongs to the category of automated execution. There is a "paradigm" difference between it and the autonomous asset management pursued by pure Crypto native solutions. The Crypto-native solutions under exploration are taking the "decentralized custody + on-chain verification" route, including AI Agent autonomous asset management, AI Agent autonomous transactions (DeFAI), AI Agent digital identity and on-chain reputation system (ERC-8004...), AI Agent on-chain governance DAO framework, AI Agent NPC and digital avatars, and many other interesting and fun directions. Ultimately, once users get used to AI Agent payments in traditional fields, their acceptance of AI Agents autonomously owning digital assets will also increase. And for those scenarios that AP2 cannot reach, such as anonymous transactions, censorship-resistant payments, and decentralized asset management, there will always be a time for crypto-native solutions to show their strength? The two are more likely to be complementary rather than competitive, but to be honest, the key technological advancements behind AI Agents currently all come from web2AI, and web3AI still needs to keep up the good work!
Share
PANews2025/09/18 07:00