Law / Investing

Add as a preferred source on Google

FuelCell Energy Investors Have Until Nov. 10 to Seek Lead Role in Suit

The complaint alleges the company concealed manufacturing limits and costs under its Fit Energy USA LP agreement; the claims have not been proven.

Updated 2 min read
Fuel-cell modules sit at assembly stations inside a manufacturing facility in Torrington, Connecticut. (AI-generated image / EconoTimes)
Fuel-cell modules sit at assembly stations inside a manufacturing facility in Torrington, Connecticut. (AI-generated image / EconoTimes)

Read the original article

Investors who acquired FuelCell securities from June 24 through Sept. 1, 2026, have until Nov. 10 to seek lead-plaintiff status in a proposed securities lawsuit over the company’s Fit Energy deal.

The complaint, filed Sept. 11 as Nguyen v. FuelCell Energy, Inc., names the company, CEO Jason B. Few and CFO Michael S. Bishop as defendants. It alleges that FuelCell lacked the manufacturing capacity to meet the agreement’s required production rate and that slower output led to higher costs, overhead and charges. The claims have not been proven.

FuelCell announced the Fit Energy agreement on June 24, describing it as a deal for up to 380 megawatts of data-center power, with an initial 30 MW phase backed by an immediate deposit. In its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, FuelCell reported an annualized production rate of about 37.1 MW at its Torrington, Connecticut, facility and said product costs and manufacturing overhead exceeded the agreement’s contractual pricing.

The company recorded $17 million in charges related to Phase 0 during the quarter, including about $4 million in inventory write-downs and $13 million in losses on firm purchase commitments. FuelCell said the charges were expected to be limited to identified Phase 0 inventory and commitments, and did not reflect management’s expectations for the agreement’s overall economic value.

FuelCell said Fit Energy could elect to proceed with the agreement’s other three phases, totaling 350 MW; those phases carry no payment obligation until Fit makes an election. At a Dec. 8 conference, the court is scheduled to consider motions on lead-plaintiff status and lead counsel, as well as possible consolidation.

Related articles

View all