Picard Medical, Inc. Class Action Lawsuit – PMI

Introduction to Picard Medical, Inc. (PMI) Securities Class Action Lawsuit

A federal securities fraud class action has been filed against Picard Medical, Inc. (NASDAQ: PMI) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including Rule 10b-5 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) on behalf of investors who bought Picard securities between September 2, 2025 and October 31, 2025. Investors allege defendants misled the market by omitting that Picard's stock was being driven by a fraudulent social media promotion scheme targeting retail investors that used impersonated financial professionals, and concealed artificial trading activity.

Behind the upbeat messaging, public reports later described an artificial buying frenzy fueled by false online claims and coordinated trading. When these reports surfaced and volatility spiked, the company stated it was not aware of any undisclosed material change, omitting mention of false rumors and manipulation. Investors say they were harmed when the stock crashed to $3.99 on October 24, 2025, a single-day 70% decline, and then continued falling to approximately $2.00 per share.

“Most PMI shareholders never file or join the class action, which means they miss out on potential recovery funds,” said Attorney Joseph Levi.

Picard Medical, Inc. (PMI) Securities Lawsuit Case Details

Case Name: Louie v. Picard Medical, Inc. et al.
Case No.: 5:26-cv-01024
Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division
Filed on: February 2, 2026

Picard Medical, Inc. (PMI) Company Profile

Picard is a holding company that owns SynCardia Systems, LLC, based in Tucson, Arizona, a medical technology business that manufactures and sells the only U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada approved implantable total artificial heart, the SynCardia TAH artificial heart. The company operates in the U.S., Europe, and China, as a medical device manufacturer and reports work on a next-generation fully implantable total artificial heart, with an FDA-approved product line.

Picard Medical, Inc. (PMI) Securities Lawsuit Class Period

September 2, 2025-October 31, 2025, inclusive.

All persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Picard securities during the Class Period, including common stock trading under the ticker symbol PMI may be eligible to join the Picard Medical, Inc. (PMI) class action lawsuit.

Allegations in the Picard Medical, Inc. (PMI) Securities Class Action Lawsuit

According to the complaint, the lawsuit targets Picard Medical, Inc.; CEO Patrick NJ Schnegelsberg; CFO Bernard Skaggs; Matt Schuster; directors Yuncai "Richard" Fang and Chris Hsieh; underwriters Westpark Capital, Inc., Sentinel Brokers Company, Inc., R.F. Lafferty & Co. Inc., and American Trust Investments; and auditor MaloneBailey, LLP. Investors allege defendants presented a positive picture of Picard's business and stock while omitting the artificial trading and online promotion allegedly propelling the share price, constituting material misstatements and omissions under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act.

The story begins on September 2, 2025, when Picard's IPO prospectus told investors it owns SynCardia, which "manufactures and sells the only U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada approved implantable total artificial heart." On September 15, 2025, Patrick NJ Schnegelsberg issued a press release touting second-quarter strength, citing "over 200% revenue growth year-over-year," improved operations, and IPO proceeds to fund development and expansion that allegedly lacked a reasonable basis. As the stock rose into late October, the company continued to speak positively about operations and prospects and omitted material risk disclosures about stock promotion and market manipulation.

Then, on October 24, 2025, after volatility spiked, the company released a statement asserting it was "not aware of any undisclosed material change in the Company's operations or financial condition" to account for the stock's swings. The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants' public statements and risk disclosures omitted that Picard's stock was the subject of a fraudulent stock promotion campaign and artificial trading activity.

Behind the scenes, investors allege a coordinated social-media-based promotion, a pump-and-dump scheme used impersonated financial professionals to spread sensational but baseless claims, creating a retail buying frenzy. The complaint further alleges that insiders and/or affiliates used offshore or nominee accounts during the price inflation campaign to execute coordinated insider share dumping. As a result, the complaint claims defendants' positive statements about Picard's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and lacked a reasonable basis that manufactured demand and artificially inflated the stock price.

The Truth Emerges

According to the complaint, on October 23, 2025, investigations and public reports described how Picard had become the subject of an illicit social-media-driven promotion spreading false rumors and social media misinformation that artificially inflated its stock price, with touts from impersonators in online forums and chat groups as the market learned the truth about the company's trading activity. Despite warning signs and public reports of manipulation as early as September 30, 2025, the company had not issued investor warnings before the crash or disclosed artificial trading activity.

The next day, on October 24, 2025, Picard addressed the volatility but said it was not aware of any undisclosed material changes in operations or finances that would explain the price moves while continuing to omit material adverse facts about the promotion scheme. These revelations and responses contradicted the company's prior optimism and its omission of manipulation risks from its public statements and stock price manipulation.

Market Reaction

The market moved in stages. In the weeks after the September 2, 2025 IPO, Picard's share price surged from $4.00 to an intraday high of $13.68, and on October 23, 2025, it closed at $13.20. After the October 23 close, during aftermarket trading, the stock abruptly fell; by October 24, 2025, it had crashed to $3.99 per share, reflecting a single-day 70% stock price crash, and subsequently declined to approximately $2.00 per share.

Next Steps

The Court will issue its order for lead plaintiff and counsel in the weeks after submissions are due.
The Court will then consider motion for class certification.
The Court will later consider a motion to dismiss.

Disclaimer: This shareholder alert is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for personalized guidance. No specific outcomes are guaranteed.

Check Eligibility

✓ Free case evaluation
✓ No cost or obligation
✓ See if you qualify

First Name *

Last Name *

Email *

Phone

Estimated Loss

Number of Shares

Purchase Date

Full Name

Submitting this form does not create an attorney-client relationship. Your information is confidential.

Or contact us directly:

(212) 363-7500 [email protected]

Never Miss Another Deadline

Choose your preferred way to stay informed of new case launches and settlement deadlines.

Scan the QR code or click the button to join.

Join on WhatsApp

First Name *

Last Name *

Email *

Full Name

Submitting this form does not create an attorney-client relationship. Your information is confidential.

[email protected] (212) 363-7500

Step 2 of 3

Certification of Plaintiff Pursuant to Federal Securities Laws

I, duly certify and say, as to the claims asserted under the federal securities laws, that:

I have reviewed a complaint filed in the action.
I did not purchase the security that is the subject of this action at the direction of plaintiff's counsel or in order to participate in this action.
I am willing to serve as a representative party on behalf of the class, including providing testimony at deposition and trial, if necessary.
My transaction(s) in Picard Medical, Inc. which are the subject of this litigation during the class period set forth in the complaint are set forth in the chart attached hereto.
Within the last 3 years,
I have not sought to serve nor have I served as a class representative in any federal securities fraud case. I have sought to serve as a class representative in
I will not accept any payment for serving as a representative party on behalf of the class beyond the Plaintiff's pro rata share of any recovery, except as ordered or approved by the court, including any award for reasonable costs and expenses (including lost wages) directly relating to the representation of the class.

Are you US Citizen?

Yes. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this No. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this

Clear

Signed pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1633.1, et seq. - and the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act as adopted by the various states and territories of the United States.

By your signature above, you confirm that have retained Levi & Korsinsky, LLP to represent you and the shareholder class as a lead plaintiff in the pending class action against Picard Medical, Inc. This representation will be on a contingency basis, meaning that Levi & Korsinsky will advance all expenses in the litigation and will only seek compensation and/or reimbursement of expenses if the firm obtains a recovery. Regardless of the result, we will never ask you to directly pay for any attorneys’ fees, expenses, or costs. Should we obtain a favorable result, we may ask the court to award us compensation and reimbursement of expenses to be paid by the defendants or as a portion of any class recovery. In exchange for our representation, you agree to cooperate as our client by providing, for example, relevant documents and deposition testimony, if necessary. During the course of this litigation, we may employ and/or work with other law firms, experts, and third-parties to successfully prosecute this action. If you are not appointed as the lead plaintiff or Levi & Korsinsky is not appointed as lead counsel, we will notify you of such decision at which time this representation will end unless otherwise extended by you and the firm. We look forward to working with you towards a successful resolution of this action.

I have reviewed the complaint linked in paragraph 1