October 10, 2021 - An investor in shares of Covia Holdings Corporation (OTC: CVIAQ) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Covia Holdings Corporation f/k/a Fairmount Santrol Holdings Inc. in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between March 15, 2016 to June 29, 2020.

Independence, OH based Covia Holdings Corporation provides diversified mineral-based and material solutions for the industrial and energy markets in the United States, Argentina, Mexico, Canada, China, and Denmark. Covia Holdings Corporation reported that its annual Total Revenue declined from over $1.84 billion in 2018 to over $1.59 billion in 2019, and that its Net Loss increased from $218.67 million in 2018 to over $1.42 billion in 2019. On May 9, 2019, after market hours, Covia Holdings Corporation revealed in a 10-Q Quarterly Report that it received a subpoena from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on March 18, 2019. The SEC was “seeking information relating to certain value-added proppants marketed and sold by Fairmount Santrol or Covia within the Energy segment.”

On November 6, 2019, during market hours, Covia Holdings Corporation revealed in a 10-Q Quarterly Report that the SEC “requested additional information and subpoenaed certain current and former employees to testify.” Shares of Covia Holdings Corporation (OTC: CVIAQ) declined from $7.34 per share in March 2019 to as low as $0.004 per share on October 28, 2020.

According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Covia Holdings Corporation (OTC: CVIAQ) common shares between March 15, 2016 to June 29, 2020, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws. More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between March 15, 2016 to June 29, 2020, the defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that Covia's proprietary value-added proppants were not necessarily more effective than ordinary sand, that Covia's revenues, which were dependent on its proprietary value-added proppants, was based on misrepresentations, that when Covia insiders raised this issue, defendants did not take meaningful steps to rectify the issue, and that as a result, defendants' statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.