February 25, 2021 - An amended consolidated complaint was filed.

September 25, 2020 - An investor in shares of Garrett Motion Inc. (NYSE: GTX, OTC: GTXMQ) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Garrett Motion Inc. in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between October 1, 2018 and September 18, 2020.

Switzerland based Garrett Motion Inc. designs, manufactures, and sells turbocharger and electric-boosting technologies for light and commercial vehicle original equipment manufacturers and the aftermarket worldwide. Garrett Motion Inc. reported that its annual Total Revenue declined from over $3.37 billion in 2018 to over $3.24 billion in 2019, and that its Net Income decreased from $1.18 billion in 2018 to $313 million in 2019.

On August 26, 2020, Garrett Motion Inc disclosed that the Company's 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. Shares of Garrett Motion Inc. (NYSE: GTX) declined from $7.15 per share on August 14, 2020, to as low as $2.54 per share on September 2, 2020.

According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Garrett Motion Inc. (NYSE: GTX, OTC: GTXMQ)) common shares between October 1, 2018 and September 18, 2020, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws.

More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between October 1, 2018 and September 18, 2020, the defendants failed to disclose to investors that, due to its agreement to indemnify and reimburse Honeywell for certain asbestos-related liability, Garrett was saddled with an unsustainable level of debt, that, as a result, Garrett had a highly leveraged capital structure that posed significant challenges to its overall strategic and financial flexibility that, as a result of the foregoing, Garrett’s ability to gain or hold market share was impaired, that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company was reasonably likely to seek bankruptcy protection, and 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.