January 19, 2021 - The case was voluntarily dismissed.

July 21, 2020 - An investor in shares of Energy Recovery, Inc. (NASDAQ: ERII) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Energy Recovery, Inc. in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between August 2, 2017 and June 29, 2020.

San Leandro, CA based Energy Recovery, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, designs, manufactures, and markets various solutions for industrial fluid flow markets worldwide. Energy Recovery, Inc. reported that its annual Total Revenue rose from $74.51 million in 2018 to $86.94 million in 2019, and that its Net Income declined from $22.09 million in 2018 to $10.91 million in 2019. On June 29, 2020, Energy Recovery, Inc. announced the termination of its 15-year contract with Schlumberger Technology Corp. ( Schlumberger ) for the exclusive use of Energy Recovery’s VorTeq hydraulic pumping system, citing different strategic perspectives as to the path to VorTeq commercialization. Without the agreement in place, the Company will be wholly responsible for the commercialization of the VorTeq technology. On this news, the Company’s share price fell $1.31 or over 14%, to close at $7.60 per share on June 30, 2020, thereby injuring investors. Shares of Energy Recovery, Inc. (NASDAQ: ERII) declined from $9.17 per share on June 8, 2020 to as low as $6.69 per share on July 9, 2020.

According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Energy Recovery, Inc. (NASDAQ: ERII) common shares between August 2, 2017 and June 29, 2020, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws.

More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between August 2, 2017 and June 29, 2020, the defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that the Company and Schlumberger Technology Corp. (“Schlumberger”) had different strategic perspectives regarding commercialization of VorTeq, that which created substantial risk of early termination of the Company’s exclusive licensing agreement with Schlumberger, that accordingly, the guidance and expectations of future license revenue was false and lacked reasonable basis, and that as a result, defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times or lacked a reasonable basis and omitted material facts. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.